Follow Us:

All ITAT

Unsigned reason cannot be treated as reasons recorded

February 28, 2018 2238 Views 0 comment Print

Where AO typed the reasons but not signed the order sheet, there were no reasons recorded for re-opening assessment as required under section 148, therefore, notice issued under section 148 was bad in law, consequently reassessment order was to be annulled.

Trade association established for serving common interest of a particular trade eligible for registration u/s 12AA

February 28, 2018 3483 Views 0 comment Print

Hyderabad bench of ITAT ruled that Telangana Corrugators Development Trust is a public charitable trust eligible for Tax Exemption. It is held so in the case of Telangana Corrugators Development Trust versus Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) while allowing the appeal of Assessee.

S.12AA Registration cannot be denied to Trust created to carry out CSR Activities

February 28, 2018 6228 Views 0 comment Print

Just because the trust has been formed for complying CSR requirements it cannot per se be the reasons for denying registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act.

Capital Gain on Sale of agricultural land Converted into stock of residential plots

February 27, 2018 36867 Views 1 comment Print

Mahaveer Yadav Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) Where assessee converted agricultural land into state stock of residential plots then the assessee was liable to pay tax as per section 45(2). The fair market value of the asset on the date of conversion as reduced by the cost of acquisition is required to be assessed under the […]

Conflict of judicial opinion does not entitle Dept to seek reference to Special Bench

February 26, 2018 2178 Views 1 comment Print

Reference to Special Bench would continue to be moved by the parties upon every subsequent non-jurisdictional High Court decision, thus, leading to a number of cases being referred to constitute Special Bench. However, correct decision is to follow the judicial hierarchy and maintain judicial discipline.

TDS on accumulated RPF balance post cessation of Employment till withdrawal?

February 26, 2018 6060 Views 0 comment Print

In the wake of the decision of the Bengaluru ITAT, in the case of “The ACIT, Circle-1(2)(1) Bengaluru vs. Shri Dilip Ranjrekar, in ITA No. 858/Bang/2016, dated 10.11.2017, an intriguing question has arisen, as to whether TDS is required to be deducted by the employer company, in the case of an erstwhile employee, who has otherwise rendered a continuous service of five years, on the interest amount earned by such employee, from the date of his cessation of employment, till the date of withdrawal of the accumulated provident fund balance.

Assessment U/s. 153C in absence of incriminating material is bad in law

February 25, 2018 4719 Views 0 comment Print

Where books of account and other documents belonging to other person, i.e., the assessee as recovered from searched party did not indicate receipt of unaccounted money by the assessee, such books and documents could not be considered as incriminating material for initiation of proceedings under section 153C against the assessee.

Payment for Acquiring Mining Rights is Capital Expenditure

February 25, 2018 15420 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT Vs. Shri K.R. Kaviraj (ITAT Bangalore) In the light of the judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd. (239 ITR 817) the impugned payment made for acquiring mining rights is capital expenditure and cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure. The reliance placed by the ld.CIT(A) on the […]

In absence of principal agent relationship section 194H not applicable

February 24, 2018 3150 Views 0 comment Print

When there is direct sale transaction between two principals and there is no principal agent relationship, provisions of section 194H are not applicable

Wealth Tax: Non striking irrelevant column in notice issued u/s 18(1)(c) renders notice invalid

February 23, 2018 2751 Views 0 comment Print

The Ld.CWT(A) should have struck off the irrelevant column and made known the assessee by mentioning for which reason the penalty was initiated. Penalty u/s 18(1)(c) of WT Act are parimateria to Income Tax Act 271(1)(c). As per settled case laws non striking the irrelevant column in the notice issued u/s 18(1)(c) renders the notice invalid and consequent penalty required to be cancelled.

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