ITAT Delhi held that scope and ambit of section 44BB of the Income tax Act is wide enough to include receipts of assessee from Cairn India and ONGC in connection with activity of prospecting for, or extraction, or production of mineral oils.
Ravindra Dayanand Sankeshwar Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) Assessee, an individual/ proprietor claimed expenses towards interest on unsecured loans. 30% disallowance of interest expenditure for non-deduction of TDS was upheld by CIT(A) holding that Act requires the forms to be submitted before the competent authority during the year under consideration and not at the time scrutiny […]
AO has no right to calculate sales on hypothetical basis ignoring the evidence submitted during the course of assessment proceedings. Once the amount is declared as turn over cannot be called concealed income and be taxed doubly on same amount. The addition U/s 68 is beyond jurisdiction of the ld. AO as the turnover is already reflected in the books of the assessee.
Kishoresinh Hemantsinh Chudasama Pipali Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Undisputedly, before the ld. CIT(A), none-appeared on behalf of the assessee and the appeal was decided ex parte. I have also gone through the Form no. 35 filed before the ld. CIT(A) and find that the assessee has rightly mentioned that email-id mentioned therein was that of […]
Ishwarbhai Madhavlal Patel-HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) In the present case, the Karta of HUF having expired in the year 2021 itself when this information was first provided and since then revised Form No. 36 in the name of the legal-heirs or representative of the deceased-assessee is not be filed as provided in Rule 26 […]
Section 68 cannot be invoked if Assessee not required to maintain books of account. Section 115BBE comes into operation only in case of income referred in Section 68/69/69A/69B/69C and 69D
No TDS deduction at source on Salary is contemplated under Section 192 in cases where a payment towards salary has accrued but is not made.
Without pointing out specific defects in documents furnished, disallowance on ad-hoc basis for failure to furnish all documentary evidence is unacceptable
ITAT held that once additions been made under Black Money Act the same addition cannot be made under Income Tax Act on the same set of facts
Addition has been made as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act which is incorrect and against the provision of Act as the said explanation deals with the disallowance and addition of expenditure the source whereof is not explained by the assessee.
