Even if the assessee was unrepresented, CIT(A) should have adjudicated the issues before him based on the case record before him but unfortunately, CIT(A) chose not to do so and dismissed the assessee’s appeal without examining the case on merits. Therefore, the condonation of delay was allowable and substantial justice required that the issues should be re-examined by CIT(A).
It is not open to the First Appellate Authority i.e., CIT(A) to set aside the order of the A.O. and order a remand or to give any directions. Hence, CIT(A) was not justified in giving direction to the A.O. to levy penalty u/s. 271AAA of the I.T. Act, 1961.
ITAT Chennai ruled in favor of Om Balaji Stores, finding no justification for disallowance u/s 40A(3). Detailed analysis of the case and the importance of documentary evidence.
Short term capital loss not claimed while filing return u/s 139(1). Loss was claimed for the first time via return u/s 153A. Claim denied according to provisions of section 80.
In absence of any findings in assessment order regarding underreporting or misreporting of income, PCIT cannot revise assessment order to initiate penalty proceedings.
Held that consideration paid by the assessee in excess of its value of tangible assets was rightly classified as goodwill the same is eligible for depreciation
Pratibha Industries Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT held that in case of parallel proceedings under Income-tax Act, 1961 and IBC, 2016, the IBC has an overriding effect over the provisions of the Income-tax Act which has been decided by Hon’ble Apex Court in Principal Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Monnet Ispat & Energy Ltd in […]
Shri. Vardhan Vishwanath Vijaya Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) In so far as the credit for taxes paid in US is concerned, one of the requirements is that the assessee has to file Form 67 which was filed before the AO only after the date of intimation under section 143(1) of the Act. Filing of Form […]
DCIT Vs Egberts India Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Chennai) From the facts, it emerges that the property at Anna Nagar has been let out by the assessee and the rental income has been offered and assessed as Income from House Property. Under this head, the assessee is entitled to claim statutory deduction of 30% and interest […]
Mahadevan HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) We noted that the individual Smt. Bhavani Mahadevan had purchased the land at Plot No.94, ARN Nagar, Korattur by way of sale deed dated 14.07.1994 and land at Plot No.II, VGN Avenue, Sennerkuppam Village by way of sale deed dated 03.08.1995. Shri R. Mahadevan had purchased the land at […]
