Building Committee (Society) Barnala Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITAT Chandigarh) It is pertinent to observe that the ld.CIT(E) failed to comprehend the role of Bar Association in judicial dispensation. He construed the existence of the assessee-society in a very narrow manner, as if it is a group of some professionals who are working for their individual […]
Shri Shyam Sunder Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Conclusion: Since assessee produced sufficient documentary evidences before AO to prove the identity of the Investor Companies, their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction and no evidence had been brought on record by AO to disprove the same, hence addition made under section 68 was […]
Dow Agrosciences India Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) We shall now deal with the observation of the TPO/DRP that the approval provided by the RBI would not constitute a valid CUP data, since the RBI does not take into account the transfer pricing provisions to determine the appropriate rates which can be considered as […]
Batliboi Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee has received total sum of Rs.11,14,00,000/- from single purchaser on sale of land (Rs.5,72,84,600/-), towards building (Rs.64,90,400/-) and sale of additional FSI (Rs.4,76,25,000/-). We find that the total sale consideration of Rs.11.14 Crores has not been doubted by the Revenue. Admittedly, the aforesaid break-up of consideration has been […]
ACIT Vs Singareni Colleries Company Ltd. (ITAT Hyderabad) On careful reading of the Notes submitted by the assessee company it is clear that the assessee is providing interest at certain percentage and credited to the fund account. Further, he observed that it is also a fact that the insurance premium is paid out of interest […]
Since in the financial statement for the relevant year (F.Y. 11-12), the auditor had made a clear disclosure that no revenue had been recognized on account of services rendered to SBI despite having incurred a cost of Rs. 3.2 crore and moreover, as per the matching ‘principl
Reassessment made by AO in respect of assessee-bank was quashed as no new material was brought on record by AO in the reopening of assessment to establish that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment as assessee had already disclosed all the information necessary for completion of original assessment and the reopening of assessment made beyond four years from the AY under consideration.
Shivratan Shrigopal Mundada Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) We do not find any relevance of the ‘completion of construction’ insofar as the exemption u/s.54F is concerned. What the section requires is that the assessee purchases a new residential house or “has within a period of three years, after the date constructed, one residential house in India.” […]
Aditya Balkrishna Shroff Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) In the present case, it is not even in dispute, and rightly so, that the receipt is in question is in the capital field but the Assessing Officer has taxed it on the basis that “the gain on realization of loan would partake character of an income under […]
Meena Lahoti Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Hyderabad) Learned counsel’s argued that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in adding impugned short term capital gains of Rs.51,72,920/- thereby ignoring the clinching fact that she had in fact indulged in development of her land in issue in the nature of […]
