ITAT Mumbai held that AO took the plausible view of granting the benefit of mutuality after due application of mind. Accordingly, revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 cannot be invoked merely because PCIT may entertain a different view in the matter.
Mujtaba Hussain Ahmed Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) Undoubtedly, the assessee had sold his ancestral agricultural land admeasuring 1 acre and 25 guntas by way of a registered sale deed dt.23.03.2019. Incidentally, on the date of sale of land, SST Team intercepted the assessee and found cash with him and when the assessee was asked to […]
Rameshkumar Tagraji Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) It is noted that the assessee during the first appellate proceeding before Ld. CIT(A) had filed the written submission mainly assailing the validity of the action of the AO to have framed the reassessment order without issuance of mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act and cited the […]
ITAT held that no addition is maintainable on deemed rent on unsold flats which are shown as stock-in-trade. Dugad Properties Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune)
SDS Cargo Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) PCIT had given a categorical finding that the AO has not carried out any enquiries on the issue of CFS charges paid to Continental Warehousing Corporation in light of relevant provisions of the Act which render the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the […]
Baldev Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) On perusal of the assessment order, it appears that the assessee has deposited cash amount to Rs.19,49,553/- in the savings bank account in Financial Year 2011-12 relevant to Assessment Year 2012-13 in question. The Assessing Officer attempted to make inquiry on the source of such cash deposits but however […]
ITAT Delhi held that proviso to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act gets applicable as reopening of assessment is initiated after four years of original assessment. Accordingly, re-opening of assessment based on mere change of opinion is unsustainable.
ITAT Delhi held that the amounts advanced for business transaction between the parties would not fall within the definition of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act.
Meena Nayyar Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, has recently, in an appeal filed before it, held that no additions can be made de hors any incriminating material for assessment under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act. The aforesaid observation was made by the Delhi ITAT, when appeals […]
Klug Avalon Mechatronics Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) ITAT held that a person is liable to deduct any sum under the provisions of chapter XVII of the Act, is under obligation to deliver or furnish a statement u/s 200(3) of the Act within the due date prescribed therein and in the event of default, […]
