When AO has not brought any material on record to show that the assessee has paid over and above the purchase consideration as claimed and evident from the bank account then, in the absence of any evidence it cannot be held that the assessee has introduced his own unaccounted money by way of bogus long term capital gain.
DCIT Vs M/s. Deversons Industries Pvt.Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad) The Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings found that the vehicles were registered in the individual name of the Directors. But the assessee claimed the depreciation and the vehicle expenses in its income-tax return. However, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee cannot claim […]
Smt Joyti Sunil Maniyar Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) In the notice issued u/s 142(1) dated 11.10.2011 a specific query was raised by the AO about the capital gain income. After that, the assessee vide reply dated 22.11.2011 conceded the fact of non-disclosing the capital gain income. From the above, it is transpired that the assessee […]
Once the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction has been proved, gift received from the brother-in-law is exempted in terms of provisions of section 56.
AO was not justified in making addition under section 68 where assessee had furnished evidences such as PAN and copies of bank statements of lenders which proved identity and creditworthiness of lenders and genuineness of impugned loan transactions.
Md. Salim Qurasi Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) We have heard rival submissions. From the papers available on the record including the paper book of the assessee, we find that the assessee had got his accounts tax audited for the Assessment Year 2013-14, on 27/09/2013.We find that the same has been filed before the ld. Assessing […]
Liquidated damages which were in nature of contractual liability on account of non-compliance of business obligations to customers were allowable expenditure
M/s. ASK Partners Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The interest paid by the firm and claimed as deduction is simultaneously susceptible to tax in the hands of its respective partners in the same manner. In the same vain, the firm is merely a compendium of its partners and its partners do not have separate legal personalities under […]
Where AO had made addition of proportionate interest paid on borrowed funds on the allegation that assessee dealing in share-trading had converted its opening stock of shares to investments, the matter was remanded back to AO to determine the actual date of conversion of shares before computing any disallowance.
Since assessee had a reasonable cause for non-deduction of TDS, penalty u/s 271C not leviable in terms of section 273B.
