Since assessee had not been served with any intimation or any other communication regarding the grant of interest under section 244A for assessment year 2009-10 and refund in question had been directly credited by department to bank account, the amount of interest had been provided in financial year 2015-16 on receiving of information from AO, therefore, addition being interest under section 244A could not be made by the AO.
The Suvikas Peoples’ Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahemdabad) Essence the RBI Directions, 1998 are prudential/ provisioning norms issued by RBI under Chapter IlI-B of the RBI Act, 1934. These norms deal essentially with income recognition. They force the NBFCs to disclose the amount of NPA in their financial accounts. They force the NBFCs […]
The only issue to be decided in both the appeals of the revenue is that whether the assessee Port Trust can be assessed in the status of Local Authority or in the status of Company in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Meera Enterprises Vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) The Chartered Accountant had prepared the return along with the necessary annexures on 15-10-2010 but due to heavy pressure on computer server of the Centralized Processing Center (CPC) Income Tax Department, Bangalore, the return filing was slow till 8 p.m. Thereafter the Chartered Accountant tried to upload the income […]
While hearing the case of Sri Chilukurthi Veeraiah vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that Assessing Officer (AO) should give reasonable opportunity to produce evidence to assessee to examine source of gift.
If AO was not satisfied regarding transaction relating to the cash deposited by partner whose identity was not in doubt and assessee had furnished all the relevant documents, then addition could have been made in the hands of said partner and not in the hands of the assessee.
Atluri Usha Rani Vs Asst. CIT (ITAT Hyderabad) I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. I have also carefully perused the development agreement-cum-GPA. The said agreement shows that the builders and developers have to bear all the expenditure for preparation of the said plan, obtaining licenses, permissions as well as execution […]
With this common order we will dispose of the captioned applications of the assessee seeking stay for the recovery of outstanding tax demand for assessment year 2009-10 & 2013-14 respectively.
Many petty payments were made in cash and it was also not ascertainable whether payments attract disallowance under section 40A(3). Clearly, assessee could not establish genuineness of the expenses, therefore, AO was justified in computing income on estimate basis.
Where assessee was a rightful owner of leased assets and lessees had confirmed the ownership of assets, and they had not claimed depreciation in their books of account for purchase and lease of assets, assessee was duly entitled to depreciation on such assets.
