Since the quantum addition stands deleted by the ITAT in the above order, there remains no basis for levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c)
ITAT Pune confirms disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct TDS on warehouse charges, emphasizing tax compliance in Vandana Dinehkumar Inani Vs ITO case.
w.e.f. 1.4.1999 computer software been included with computers for rate of depreciation in Rules, entitling assessee to 60% depreciation rate
Addition u/s 43B on account of External Development Charges (EDC) not paid to HUDA before due date of filing return of income not justified
As the turnover of the assessee was less than the prescribed limit fixed for tax audit, provisions of Section 44AB of the Act are not applicable to the assessee. When the provisions of Section 44 AB of the Act are not applicable to the facts of the case, levy of penalty under Section 271B of the Act does not arise.
Share application money is not loan or deposit and hence not falls u/s 269SS of the Act and penalty u/s 271D cannot be levied.
ITAT Hyderabad’s decision exempts Ochre Media Pvt. Ltd. from late filing fees under Section 234E for TDS returns, citing procedural amendments.
ITAT Delhi held that if in the initial year of claim the depreciation, is allowed, the claim cannot be disturbed in the subsequent years.
ITAT Jodhpur held that addition on the basis of reasons not forming limited scrutiny is unsustainable as Assessing Authority cannot exceed the jurisdiction beyond the reasons specified for limited scrutiny.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that payment of interest towards compromise agreement was not made towards any infraction of law and therefore, the same is allowable under section 37 of the Income Tax Act.
