ITAT Delhi held that penalty under section 271AAA not imposable as undisclosed income admitted in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) and specifies the manner in which the income was derived.
ITAT Delhi held that the revenue can bring expenditures incurred in earlier years to be taxed in subsequent years if it is proved that the expenditure incurred was bogus.
ITAT Mumbai held that provisions of Chapter X cannot be invoked for making a TP adjustment in case of Advertisement, marketing and promotion (AMP) expenses.
ITAT Indore held that non-deduction of TDS due to genuine and bona fide belief is reasonable cause under section 273B and accordingly penalty u/s 271C not imposable.
Krishna Das Agarwal Vs DDIT/ADIT (Inv.) (ITAT Jaipur) Black Money Act – Company Is a Separate Legal Entity and The Assessee Cannot Be Held to Be Beneficial Owner Ipso-Facto Due to Majority Shareholding / Directorship.- FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR These bunch of five appeals consist of one appeal filed by the […]
ITAT Delhi – Mere non-construction of property cannot be a ground to deny benefit u/s 54F. The beneficial nature and the object of the provision is ought to be considered by the Income Tax Authorities
ITAT Jaipur held that being a debatable issue there was a reasonable cause for non-deduction of TDS on specified transactions and accordingly penalty under section 271C of the Income Tax Act not justified.
ITAT Delhi held that NAV method adopted by the assessee is one of the recognized methods provided in rule 11UA of the Rules. Accordingly, the addition made u/s. 56(2)(viib) of the Act, is hereby directed to be deleted.
ITAT Bangalore held that as professional and consultation charges & purchase of fixed assets are capitalized in the books of accounts, it should not be considered for computation of proportionate TP adjustment.
ITAT Pune held that the conclusion arrived by AO on his satisfaction of details furnished by the assessee, cannot be found to be erroneous simply because Pr. CIT does not feel satisfied with the said conclusion. Accordingly, invocation of revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 unjustified.
