ACIT Vs A One Enclave (ITAT Indore) At any stage revenue has not disputed the fact that the alleged amount surrendered during the survey was unaccounted business income of the assessee and not from any other sources. Section 11 5BBE of the Act was inserted by Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1.4.2013 which restricts the claim […]
Transactions carried out through current account for business purposes would not fall within the definition of Deemed Dividend. Therefore provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the I.T. Act, 1961, would not apply.
Muradul Haque Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Finance (No.2) Act has made amendment to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2015. Various benches of the Tribunals including the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal, have held the amendment made by Finance (No 2) Act to be curative in nature. We further finds the coordinate bench of the […]
Government Secondary School Principal Officer Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The issue under consideration is whether the late filing fees u/s 234E can be deleted if there is a ‘reasonable cause’ for such default? In the present case, the assessee is the Principal of Secondary School and responsible for deducting tax at source, depositing the same […]
Whether the disallowance of Interest u/s 36(1)(iii) is justified in law? If interest free funds available it presumed that Investments made from that available funds.
The issue under consideration whether conversion of the case from limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny is justified in law?
The window for disallowance is indicated in section 14A and is only to the extent of disallowing expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to tax exempt income.
Adjournment can be granted in the absence of ‘Vakalatnama’ based on Principle of Natural Justice. Therefore, all the Misc. Applications of the assessee are allowed.
whether rejection of approval u/s 10(23C) on the allegation of institution existing not solely for the purpose of education but for the purpose of profit is justified in law?
Deepak Bhardwaj Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Only question that arises for our consideration is whether the unutilised portion of capital gains is liable for tax either in the year in which such long term capital gains arose or in the year in which the period of 3 years for such utilisation expires. Under identical facts […]
