New Vision Net to Home (P) Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The assessee noticed the error in its computation of fringe benefits and moved a rectification application which was denied by the AO who was of the opinion that the online filed ITR cannot be rectified u/s.154. We have carefully considered the grievance of the […]
ACIT Vs S.P. Singla Construction P. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 68 Conclusion: In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal dismissed the Revenue appeal under Section 6 of the Income Tax Act and held that that assessee discharged its initial onus to prove the identity of the Investors, their creditworthiness […]
PPG Coatings India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) It was submitted that SAP license was purchased by the AE at Netherland in bulk quantities. A copy of the agreement entered into between the said AE and the third party along with the copy of the debit note raised by the AE was submitted. It […]
Hyundai Motor India Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) The next issue that came up for consideration from ground No. 6 of assessee appeal is disallowance u/s.43B(c) of the Act, in respect of performance incentive paid to employees. Facts with regard to impugned dispute are that for the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2016-17, […]
ACIT Vs Punjab & Sind Bank (ITAT Delhi) The issue in the present ground is with respect to the disallowance of contribution to Punjab & Sind Bank Employees Pension Fund Trust under Section 36(1)(iv) of the Act r.w. Rule 87 & 88 of the Income Tax Rule, 1962. We find that identical issue arose before […]
Vasantlal Nyalchand Kikavat Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) The case was reopened pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing, Kolkata wherein it was alleged that the assessee was beneficiary of bogus Long-Term Capital gains (LTCG) by dealing in a scrip namely M/s Unisys Software & Holding Industries Ltd. (in short ‘Unisys’). Accordingly, the case […]
District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bengalore) Conclusion: Reassessment beyond four years was not valid in the absence of failure on part of assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts necessary for assessment. Held: Assessee claimed deduction of Rs.3,50,00,000/- u/s 36(1)(viia). However, assessee debited only Rs.3,00,00,000/- to the profit and loss […]
Suresh Bansal Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Basing on the CBDT instruction No 1916 dated 11/5/1994 and while referring to the answer to question No. 10 in the statement of the assessee recorded at the time of search and seizure, Ld. AR submitted that out of the total gold of 590 g, learned Assessing Officer only […]
An additional surcharge, to be called the Education Cess to finance the Government’s commitment to universalise quality basic education, is proposed to be levied at the rate of two per cent on the amount of tax deducted or advance tax paid, inclusive of surcharge.
Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Conclusion: In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal observed trade incentive to distributor, trade discounts and issuance of handsets on Free of Cost as business expense. Facts: The assessee company filed its return of income on 30.11.2013 declaring total income at Rs.5,35,77,93,880/-. Later, the return […]
