Bechtel France SAS Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Facts: The taxpayer is a company incorporated in France and engaged in the business of procurement and construction. It had set up a project office at Mumbai with site offices at other locations in India to build certain refinery and certain complex. The Commissioner of Income-tax observed that there […]
ITO Vs Super Hospitality Services Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad) Ld. CIT(A) noted that the notice issued in the name of the assessee company by the Central Excise and Customs and Service Tax Department dt.20/11/2009 , which was the basis of reopening the case and making the impugned additions was also issued to Mr. Keshav Alwa, […]
Vodafone Idea Limited Vs PCIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITA allows depreciation @ 25% on spectrum fee and held that provisions contained under section 35ABB are not applicable to spectrum fee and it further held that PCIT cannot keep an issue alive on the pretext that the order passed by the Tribunal is not accepted by the […]
In this case, we note that assessee is claiming exemption u/s. 80IC. The assessee has not filed return of income u/s. 139(1). As per the provisions of section80 AC it is mandatory for the assessee to file return of income u/s.139 (1) to be eligible to claim deduction u/s. 80-IA or 80-IB, or 80-IAB or 80-IC or 80-ID or 81-E. It is undisputed that assessee has not filed return of income under section 139 (1). Hence, as per the provisions of the act, the assessee is not entitled to claim the deduction.
A perusal of the record shows that this allegation of the Ld. Pr. CIT is correct in so far as no query has been raised by the AO on these two issues and neither has the assessee made any submissions either before the AO or even before the Ld. PR. CIT on these two issues even when the said issues were duly mentioned in the show cause notice issued u/s 263 of the Act. Accordingly, we have no option but to uphold the impugned order u/s 263 of the Act on these two issues.
Kamla Retail Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Chandigarh) It is no doubt true that it is incumbent upon the assessee to account for the expenses in respective financial year in which they are incurred or the liability towards such expenses has accrued which is in line with the mercantile system of accounting as well as concept […]
ICMAI Registered Valuers Organisation Vs CIT (E) (ITAT Delhi) From a bare reading of the impugned order under section 12AA of the Act, it appears that the assessee has failed to respond to the requirements of the CIT(E) to enable him to appreciate the relevant facts for the purposes of registration. However, in the same […]
DCIT Vs Ernet India (ITAT Delhi) The facts in brief are that assessee is an Autonomous Society under the Department of Information & Technology, Ministry of Communication & Information Technology, Government of India, which was established as a non-profitable organization. It was registered under Section 12A of the Act vide certificate / order dated 26.03.2004. […]
K.C. Marketing Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) Assessee has claimed various expenditure from its principal by way of reimbursement. The copies of relevant bills as well as credit notes issued by M/s Satnam Overseas Ltd. in favor of assessee has also been placed on page nos. 38 to 83 of paper-book. The statement of TDS deducted […]
P.S. Jagdish Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai) We noted that the return of income filed by the assessee was processed by CPC, Bengaluru and intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act was issued on 05.03.2012 (which is not disputed by Revenue). Admittedly, the AO passed rectification order on 20.06.2016. The claim of the assessee is that the rectification […]
