ITAT Delhi held that that expenditure incurred between setting up and commencement of business could not have been capitalized and was to be allowed as business expenditure.
ITAT Pune held that as the assessee failed to establish why the shops were sold at loss to the partners and interest persons, principle of fraud squarely gets applicable. Accordingly, disallowance of loss duly justified.
ITAT Jaipur rules in favor of Shri Deepak Mata, deleting penalties under Sections 271E and 271D for loan transactions below Rs.20,000 threshold.
CIT(E)’s order is also a non-speaking one to this extent we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s substantive grievance back to the very authority for appropriate adjudication as per law
Filing of Form No. 67 under Rules 128 of Income Tax Rules is a procedural requirement, therefore, is a directory in nature, non-compliance thereof does not disentitled assessee in claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC)
If in the initial year of claim the depreciation, is allowed, the claim cannot be disturbed in the subsequent years
Assessee should be allowed benefit of deduction under section 54B of Act since purchase in new property has been made out of advances received towards sale of agricultural properties held by assessee.
ITAT Chennai rules in favor of First STP Pvt. Ltd., restoring matters to CIT(A) and AO for fresh adjudication due to missed opportunities and severe stress.
ITAT held that assessment order is bad in law as assessing authority passed order u/s 143(3) without issuing mandatory notice u/s 143(2)
Assessee must be informed of grounds of penalty proceedings through statutory notice and an omnibus notice suffers from vice of vagueness
