There is no evidence of any construction activity or of the fact that assessee has invested the proceeds in statutory deposits and then spent any proceeds of the sales consideration of two properties he had sold, into the construction over this plot. Thus the property in which part investments of capital gains was done continued to be plot for all purposes and intent, for the assessee in the period when construction was to atleast to be started, if not completed.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of agreement which is not even signed without any corroborative material is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance alleging that the hedging transactions in non-cleared securities are illegal are unsustainable in law
ITAT Mumbai held that long term capital loss arising out of the sale of shares and units of mutual funds on which STT was paid and covered under section 10(38) could not be set off against long-term capital gain arising out of the sale of land as per section 70(3) of the Act.
ITAT Delhi held that as payment of rent and common area maintenance charges is made to distinct entities/ companies, TDS @10% u/s 194-I is deductible in case of payment of rent and TDS @2% u/s 194C is deductible in case of payment of Common Area Maintenance charges.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 68 for investment in joint venture unsustainable as assessee has duly discharged the onus and given all the necessary documents for the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the parties.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee is entitled to raise the additional legal submissions and also additional claims before the appellate authorities. Accordingly, appellate authorities have jurisdiction to entertain the new claim.
Bokaro Power Supply Co. Pvt Vs Addl. CIT Special Range(ITAT Delhi) In the written submissions the assessee has agitated regarding charging of interest of Rs. 48,069/- u/s. 234 A of the Act and submitted that the company has electronically uploaded form 3CEB on 30th November 2015 as well as the Income Tax Return on same […]
ITAT held that provisions of section 56(2)(viia) of are applicable only in cases where purchased share become property in the hands of buyer company and, if shares are of any other company.
If purpose of incentive or subsidy was to enable assessee to set up a new unit or to expand existing unit then receipt of subsidy was of capital in nature.
