Follow Us:

All ITAT

Penalty Notice without Application of Mind by AO is Invalid

February 28, 2018 2073 Views 0 comment Print

Assessing Officer has issued notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 27.03.2015 without striking off the irrelevant words, the penalty proceedings show a non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer and is, thus, unsustainable.

Addition U/s 68 merely for Share capital/ premium for Receipts from companies having registered office at same address not justified

February 28, 2018 3723 Views 0 comment Print

Commissioner (Appeals) therefore, rightly noted that there is no law that more than one Company cannot have its Registered Office at one address. The Companies could have change their address later on.

ITAT deletes Addition on account of notional interest on interest free advance

February 28, 2018 4494 Views 0 comment Print

Shri John Jacob Vs JCIT (ITAT Indore) Assessee had produced books of account and audited statements, which proved that the assessee had sufficient surplus in his capital account to give interest free loan. Further that, the AO as well as CIT(A) had not brought anything on record to show that money so advanced was out […]

AO cannot set-off of brought forward loss before allowing remuneration to partner

February 28, 2018 9321 Views 0 comment Print

Computation of book profit is as per section 40(b) and remuneration to partner is based on current year’s “Book Profits”, while set-off of brought forward losses is to be granted in terms of section 72. Therefore, while arriving at business income, deduction of section 40(b) is to be given first and then if at all there remains positive income, brought forward losses are to be set off.

Section 148 Notice in the name of non-existent firm was null and void

February 28, 2018 10413 Views 0 comment Print

AO issued notice under section 148 in the name of firm which had been converted into a private limited company. Assessee’s case was that re-assessment order passed by AO under section 143(3) read with section 147 was null and void. Held: Undisputedly, reassessment proceedings were initiated by AO on a non-existent firm and hence, reassessment order was null and void.

No Penalty for Delay in filing AIR due to reasonable cause

February 28, 2018 1749 Views 0 comment Print

Sub Registrar Dhansura Vs DIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Appellant is a Govt. servant and ld. AR stated that they have assigned job to submit AIR to some outsources agency and sometime staff of the outsources agency become careless. In these case, appellant is a newly incumbent with the office and was not aware of the income […]

S.40A(3) No Disallowance for Cash payments exceeding prescribed limit not claimed as expenditure

February 28, 2018 5226 Views 0 comment Print

These two appeals are filed by the Revenue and the assessee respectively challenging the order dated 18-12-2012 in Appeal No. 495/09-10/284 passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XXXIII, New Delhi (hereinafter for short called as the learned Commissioner (Appeals)).

Re-Assessment Invalid if order sheet recording reason for reopening is unsigned

February 28, 2018 2367 Views 0 comment Print

Sri Pinnamaraju Venkatapathi Raju Visakhapatnam Vs JCIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam) In the instant case, on verification of the assessment record, it is noticed that the A.O. typed the reasons but not signed the order sheet, thus there are no reasons recorded for reopening of assessment as required u/s 148 of the Act. The A.O. neither complied […]

TDS U/s. 195 not deductible on Payment of commission to non-resident if No operations of foreign agent carried on in India

February 28, 2018 5880 Views 0 comment Print

Bengal Tea & Fabrics Ltd. Vs Dy. CIT (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT held that when no business operations of commission agent were carried on in India, commission earned by them would be outside the ambit of income ‘deemed to accrue or arise in India’ for the purpose of section 5(2)(b) read with section 9(1)(i) of Income […]

No Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) if Not specifically mentioned in assessment order as to which limb penalty was imposed

February 28, 2018 5985 Views 0 comment Print

Levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified, where both the assessment order and show cause notice failed to state the specific charge of concealment and/or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by assessee.

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930