The issue under consideration is whether to acquire jurisdiction under section 153C is it require that the seized documents must be incriminating and must relate to the assessment year whose assessment were sought to be reopened?
DCIT Vs Alok Industries Limited (ITAT Mumbai) Issue raised is with respect to disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The Revenue contends that assessee did not have adequate interest free funds, and that assessee could not establish commercial expediency. The disallowance in this regard has been done on the same reasoning as in the […]
DCIT Vs B. E. Billimoria & Co. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) The material on record would show that the assessee being resident corporate assessee was assessed for the year under consideration u/s. 143(3) on 27/10/2017. During assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee sold an office premises vide agreement dated 31/03/2015 for a consideration of Rs. […]
ITO Vs Gautam B. Bafna (ITAT Mumbai) In the instant case, the corresponding sales made out of disputed purchases were not doubted by the Ld. AO before us. No contrary evidence to this effect was also produced by the Ld. DR before us. It is not in the dispute that the assesee had indeed made […]
ACIT Vs Safari Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) Conclusion: Where there was no transfer of shares but only a pledge of shares for purposes of obtaining a loan and revenue not disputed the fact of return of loan and also receipt of pledged shares creditor, no capital gain could be charged. Only income was actually […]
Ritin Lakhmani Vs PCIT (ITAT Kolkata) In this case The ld. Pr. CIT has simply cut and pasted para 5 to para 5.12.3 and also para 6 from the orders he had passed u/s 263 of the Act from the order of the Pr. CIT passed u/s 263 of the Act in the case of […]
Where regular assessment for the year under consideration remained unabated as on date of search, same could not be interfered with while framing section 153A assessment, in the absence of incriminating material discovered during search.
Santosh Kumar Subbai Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) In the instant case, the assessee has entered into development agreement for construction of duplex houses and assessee was to receive the constructed area of 5000 sq.ft by virtue of development agreement. However, after entering into agreement, the developer has vanished and no real development took place till […]
Sanmin Trading & Holding Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) The issue under consideration is whether addition made u/s 68 on the ground that the share capital received is seen not a genuine credit is justified in law? ITAT states that section 68 of the Act provides that if any sum found credited in the […]
The issue under consideration is whether amenities being part and parcel of building will be tax under head ‘Income from house property’ or ‘Income from other sources’?
