ITAT held that Reasonable time limit for issue of notice u/s 201(1)/201(1A) is 4 years and Assessee cannot be taxed for non-deduction of TDS U/s. 195 if non-resident discharged obligation with respect to payment of capital gains tax
ITAT Held that, since assessee ceased to be in existence as on the date when Ld. AO passed the impugned order of assessment, assessment so framed is not sustainable in the eye of law.
Closer of capital gain account without NOC of AO, the broad provisions and compliance of law surpass the mere default in not taking prior permission of ITO before closer of account
ITAT Held that replacement of parts of an existing machinery in the course of their working will be a revenue expenditure.
ITAT Held that addition on the basis of the opening balance of unsecured loan treating the same as current year transaction by invoking section 68 of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable.
ACIT Vs Rohit Bal Designs Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Ld. A.O has committed an error by passing assessment order based on standalone basis despite fact that he had full knowledge of amalgamation while making the addition. The Ld. A.O should have considered the effect of amalgamation more so in view of the specific mandate of […]
Held that payment made for usage of rights for the internet and telecom facility doesn’t fall in the nature of work defined u/s 194C and hence TDS not deductible.
A.O while working out disallowance under section 40A(2)(b), had though observed that the payment of salary to the aforementioned two related parties in question was found to be excessive, but had fundamentally erred by not opining as to what as per him was the fair market value of the service which were being rendered by the aforementioned related persons, considering which the payments made to them by the assessee were to held as excessive.
Dismissal of appeal in limine on account of non payment of taxes & non filing of returns u/s.153A. Appeal restored to file of CIT(A) in view of proviso to section 249(4)(b) to exercise the discretion vested in him & to consider the plea taken by appellant as regards financial difficulties.
Levy of penalty by the assessing officer after passage 30 months after the completion of the assessment, we are of the opinion that the penalty proceedings are barred by limitation and consequently penalties levied under section 271B cannot be sustained
