Shiv Prakash Bajaj Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur) It is not in dispute that the assessee surrendered a sum of Rs. 30.00 lass on account of incriminating material found during the search, therefore, the transaction of loan between two independent parties even if through the service of the assessee being broker cannot be thrust upon the […]
Assesse-cooperative society registered under the Maharashtra Co-op. Society Act, 1960 was entitled for exemption under section 80P on giving of loans to members/nominal members as the definition of ‘member’ given in section 2(19) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act took within its sweep even a nominal member, associate member and sympathizer member and there was no distinction made between duly registered member and nominal, associate and sympathizer member.
Many a times, we come across cases where the invoice has been raised close to the cut-off date, i.e. closer to the end of a financial year and the customer has accounted for and paid the invoice amount, as well as deducted and deposited the tax at applicable rates in the subsequent financial year.
The income from non-members was offered to tax by assessee, whereas membership fee from its own members was claimed as exempt on the principle of mutuality. Assessee being a trade association of software industries, it’s main object is to promote and protect the interest of its members. Membership received from its own members came within the principle of mutuality. Once assessee is governed by principle of mutuality, even if there are difference class of members, some of whom are not entitled to vote, the club would not be cease to be governed by principle of mutuality.
Order under section 143(1) denying benefit of exemption under section 11 in case of granting of deemed registration by CIT after expiry of time limit of six months was contrary to the legal principles and thus, rejection of assessee’s application for rectification under section 154 was invalid.
ITAT are of the view that u/s. 68 of the Act, it is only the credit entry appearing in the books of account of an assessee for the relevant previous year, that can be treated as unexplained cash credit in the absence of proper explanation by the assessee
The AO has relied on sub-rule (1) of section 37BA for denying the benefit of TDS during the year under consideration. This part of the Rule provides that the credit for TDS shall be given to the person to whom payment has been made or credit has been given on the basis of information relating to TDS furnished by the deductor. What is material for sub-rule (1) is the beneficiary of credit for the TDS, being the person to whom payment has been made, which in the instant case is the assessee.
The issue under consideration is whether TDS will be granted in the year in which assessee has recorded the corresponding income even if the deposit of TDS is in next financial year?
Shri Dinesh Khodidas Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmadabad) The issue under consideration is whether A.O. is correct in referring the matter to DVO to find FMV by rejecting valuation report submitted by assessee? In the present case, assessee sold a land along with others co-owners. It had submitted the valuation report as on 1-4-1981 of […]
Where assessee had filed return under section 153A, which was accepted by revenue, therefore, no penalty under section 271(1)(c) could be imposed for concealment of income because return filed under section 153A would be deemed to be return filed under section 139.
