Smt. Sarita Kashyap Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi) A scrutiny of the assessment order would clearly reveal that it is not a case where the Assessing Officer has passed the order mechanically without any inquiry and proper application of mind. Whereas, learned PCIT has considered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue […]
Beena Shammi Chaudhari Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) `A registered document shall operate from the time from which it would have commenced to operate if no registration thereof had been required or made, and not from the time of its registration‟. A document is first executed and then submitted for registration, if required. Normally, it takes […]
Malla Foundation Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITAT Bangalore) The CIT(E) has refused to grant approval u/s 80G of the Act primarily for the reason that the assessee has not produced the necessary proof as regards the activities of the assessee-trust and in absence of the same it is not possible to verify the genuineness of the […]
ITAT held that, the said amendment to Section 39(1)(va) and Section 43B effected by Finance Act 2021 is having prospective effect. Since, the said amendment is having prospective effect and not being retrospective one the same cannot be applied to the present case.
Late Shri Saifulla Abubakar Inamdar Legal Heir Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) Firstly, it is relevant to mention that the assessee did not take up the issue of Inami land before the AO. It was for the first time that the assessee raised this issue before the ld. CIT(A) contending that in the absence of any […]
Sandeep Modi Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) It is noted that the assessee has taken a life insurance policy in AY 2012-13 of the SBI of sum assured to the tune of Rs.10,88,000/- (along with credit bonus of 3.25%) by paying single premium of Rs.10,00,000/-. And in this year (AY 2017-18), the assessee received the LIC […]
Omprakash Pandey Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The assessee is aged about 71 years. The appeal before the CIT(A) was filed on 15.10.2020 electronically. Due to Covid-19 pandemic, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had directed exclusion of period from 15.03.2020. If this period is excluded, the delay has to be explained only between 15.11.2019 and 14.03.2020. The […]
Mattapalli Ram Kumar Vs ACIT (ITAT Vishakhapatanam) It is undisputed fact that the assessee had received compensation of Rs.1,33,88,000/- under compulsory acquisition of land under RFCTLARR Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has heavily relied on the Circular 36/2015 dated 25.10.2016 issued by the CBDT, wherein, it was mentioned that income tax shall not […]
Joison Kundu Kulam Johny Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) Assessee submitted that his case was mishandled by one Mr. Nagesh Shastry, Income Tax Practitioner, who has been indulging in claim of fraudulent refunds by fictitious claim of deductions, which was unearthed by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department. It was submitted that without the […]
ITO Vs ARCIL SBPS 024 I Trust (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT observed that Ld.CIT(A) has dealt with the issue in detail and gave a clear finding that assessee is a revocable trust and not an AOP. In view of the provisions of section 61, 62 and 63 of the Act, it was held that income is […]
