BSC C&C Kurali Toll Road Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The issue under dispute is with regard to availability of depreciation to the assessee whether it is to be allowed keeping the right to collect toll fee as intangible assets or it to be treated as building or plant & machinery as held in the […]
Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran Vs JCIT (ITAT Pune) We have also considered judicial precedents placed on record. In this case penalty has been levied u/s. 272A(2)(k) of the Act due to late filing of TDS statements/returns. However, it is an undisputed fact as admitted by the parties herein, that no loss has been caused to the […]
ITO Vs Chawli Devi (ITAT Chandigarh) Interest received by assessee on compulsary acquisition of of its land u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act is in the nature of compensation and not interest which is taxable under the head of income from other sources u/s 56. FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT These […]
Sanjay Sultania Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack) CBDT in the circular dated 10.3.2003 (supra) has directed the revenue authorities that if confession not based upon credible evidence, are later retracted by the concerned assesses while filing the returns of income, such confessions do not serve any useful purpose. In the present case, there was substantial evidence […]
Seth Carbon and Alloys Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) We find that assessee by furnishing all the aforesaid documents had duly explained the nature and source of credit in the form of share capital and share premium received from the aforesaid two shareholders. From the balance sheet of the shareholders, it could be seen […]
ITO Vs Shraddha & Prasad Joint Venture (ITAT Pune) This appeal preferred by the Revenue emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeal), Pune-3 dated 29.08.2017 for the assessment year 2014-15 as per the following grounds of appeal on record : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Ld. […]
ITO Vs Amit Murlidhar Kamthe (ITAT Pune) Firstly, no possession was given to the developer under the JDA as an owner. Secondly, a part of the land at the material time in 2008 vested in the Government of Maharashtra. Thirdly, the transaction admittedly fell through and a part of the land was eventually sold to […]
Vijay Mohan Harde Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) A copy of the notice issued u/s 274 of the Act has been placed in the appeal folder, from which it is discernible that the AO did not strike off either of the two limbs viz., concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, […]
Simranpal Singh Suri Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) This shows that the notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee on the very same day on which the assessee appeared and furnished copy of ITR in response to notice u/s 148 of the IT Act. It has been held in various decisions that when the notice […]
Addition made on account of AMP expenses qualified as an ‘international transaction’ under the terms of section 92B(1) read with section 92F(v) was not justified as AMP Expenses did not qualify as an ‘international transaction’ for the purposes of section 92B firstly, there was no international transaction in the form of any agreement or arrangement on AMP expenditure incurred by assessee company; and secondly, under FAR analysis also, no such benefit from the AMP expenditure having any kind of bearing on the profits, income, losses or assets as accrued to the AE or any kind of benefit has arisen to the AE.
