DCIT Vs Mapsa Tapes Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Facts-Assessment u/s 153C was challenged on the grounds that assessment order dated 31.3.2016 u/s 153C/143(3) was passed without dropping the proceedings initiated vide notice dated 8.9.2015 under section 153A of the Act and disposing off the objection filed by the assessee to initiation of assessment proceedings. Further, […]
Smt. Poonam Mittal Vs ITO (ITAT Amritsar) We find that the AO had invoked his powers u/s.154 of the Act for disallowing u/s.40A(3) of the Act the assessee’s claim for deduction of bonus of Rs.2,47,380/- that was stated to have been paid in cash, i.e., in excess of the prescribed limit of Rs.20,000/-. In our […]
Sansthan Shree Eknath Maharaj Vishwastha Mandal Vs ITO (Exemption) (ITAT Pune) There is no dispute on the fact that the assessee filed its return of income on 17.01.2017 for the year under consideration. The approval was granted by the ld. CIT(E) u/s 12AA on 16.05.2017. At this stage, it is relevant to take note of […]
ACIT Vs P & R Infraprojects Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) A perusal of the assessment order as well as the order of the CIT(A) shows that no notice u/s 143(2) was ever issued to the assessee before completing the assessment u/s 143(3)/147. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel that it is mandatory to issue […]
DCIT Vs J. P. Iscon Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad) The brief facts leading to the case is this that the assessee had given inter-corporate deposit to six subsidiaries companies namely Dhanlaxmi Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Amit Intertrade Pvt. Ltd., Dhwani Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Rich Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Gujarat Mall Management Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Palitana Sugars Mills […]
SBW Udyog Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Allahabad) Deduction allowed for belated payment of employee contribution to PF/ESI, which is deposited beyond the due date stipulated under the relevant statutes governing PF/ESI, but the same stood deposited before the due date for filing of return of income. Facts- The assessee filed its return of income u/s. […]
Once bogus purchases had gone into profit and loss account, and sales were not doubted, only option left with AO was to make addition of gross profit embedded in bogus purchases. Accordingly, AO was directed to restrict addition to the extent of 9.25% of impugned purchases as assessee had shown gross profit ratio of 9.25% in the year ending March, 2012.
Dhanesh Kumar Jain Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) In this case Assessee by mistake not claimed deduction u/s. 57(iv) of Income Tax Act, 1961 i.e. @ 50% of interest on compensation that was received by Assessee on acquisition of his agricultural land by Land Collector. ITAT held that mistake, was in the nature of a mistake […]
Dr. B. Lal Clinical Laboratory Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) In the instant case, admittedly and undisputedly, the employees’ contribution to ESI and PF collected by the assessee from its employees have been deposited well before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Further, the ld D/R […]
Madhavi Raksha Sankalpa Vs CIT (Exemptions) (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT noticed that the CIT(Exemptions) has passed the order on 31.08.2020 during the pandemic period without hearing the appellant. It is against the principles of natural justice. A proper and reasonable opportunity is liable to be given to the appellant in accordance with law, therefore, in the […]
