Whether the ex-parte order of the CIT(Exemptions) denying 80G exemption is justified in law? ITAT dismissed ex-parte order of CIT(E) on the basis of principles of natural justice
Dismissal of Appeal by ITAT after filing Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 before receiving Form 3 from Department
The issue under consideration is whether the assessee is correct in claiming depreciation on customer list and goodwill by considering it as intangible asset?
The issue under consideration is whether CIT(A) is correct in holding that the appellant is not a state under Article 289 of the Constitution of India and therefore, liable to tax under the Income Tax Act?
The disallowance of the expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia) would automatically enhance the taxable income of the assessee and the assessee is eligible for the deduction u/s 10A of the Income-tax Act on the enhanced income.
Since as per amendment made in the law by which the electronic filing of the appeal before the authorities is mandatory, Hence the appeal filed by the assessee will be dismissed by ITAT directing them to file the appeal before CIT(A) in Electronic Form.
Depreciation under section 32 could not be claimed on an undivided share of land as assessee had shown the land separately in the block of assets which was not entitled for depreciation.
Whether AO is correct in rejecting the claim of assessee regarding the deduction u/s 54F, which was made first time during Reassessment Proceedings?
It is a settled principle of law that where addition to assessee’s income is made on estimate basis penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed.
In balance sheet of assessee credit balance of lenders had been shown at Rs. 49 lacs and Rs. 13 lacs and details of accounts along with confirmation, addresses and PAN of lenders were furnished before AO for verification. Even assessee had furnished copy of assessment orders passed in case of lender for the relevant year for verification. Apart from that, funds had been received by assessee through banking channel, and therefore, all the ingredients necessary for proving cash credit under section 68 stood satisfied by assessee. Therefore, AO was not justified in making addition under section 68.
