ITO Vs Balwas Realty and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) Leasing and service charges from leasing premises of special nature as per client’s need to taxed as business income Conclusion: Where assessee-company was not simply letting out a structure to earn rental income out of it rather it was in the business of building and […]
Sodexo SVC India Pvt Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Conclusion: Order passed by AO under section 201(1)/201(1A) for failure to deduct TDS under section 194C on the reimbursement of the meal vouchers to the affiliates was barred by limitation as the amended limitation period of seven years under section 201(3) was effective from 1-10-2014 and […]
Mr. Trilok Chand Chaudhary Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Conclusion: AO made assessment under section 153A in case of assessee by using the material found in the course of search at the premise of third party which was not permitted in view of the express provision of the law as proceedings should be initiated u/s 153C […]
Though AO had issued notice under section 148 on 26-3-2014, i.e., within period of six years from the end of relevant assessment year, however, it was returned unserved by postal authorities and even notice by affixture was also served on 4-4-2014 and there was no report of AO containing names and addresses of witnesses having identified the property, therefore, in the absence of section 148 notice served within stipulated period, reassessment proceedings were invalid.
When the books of accounts was rejected, the income of assessee was to be estimated on some reasonable basis for which comparable case and history of assessee could be taken as a guide. Thus, the N.P rate @ 8% applied by the authorities below was without any basis and material on records, the same was rejected and was considered fair to apply an average rate of earlier two years which was 3.50%.
DCIT Vs Atlas Copco (India) Limited (ITAT Pune) The assessee has raised a legal ground challenging the validity of assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called `the Act’). The moot point is as to whether such a long delay deserves condonation. At this stage, it is relevant to […]
Smt. Asha Gandhi Vs The ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) Conclusion: Tribunal urged State to remove violations of tax laws by new assessees such as part time enterprising housewives, illiterate, semi-skilled men/women or teenagers by highlighting the concepts of agents of economic change; creation of Tax Advisory Cell; and coming out with Policy/Tax Compliance Scheme for the […]
This is a simple case of acquiring shares of certain companies from certain shareholders without paying any cash consideration and instead the consideration was settled through issuance of shares to the respective parties. That is, section 68 of I.T. Act, 1961 does not apply to cases of purchase of share assets and allotment of shares by the appellant when purchase and allotment are under a barter
The question raised in appeal is challenging the action of CIT(A) in confirming the addition made on account of Section 14(A) r.w.s. 8D(2)(ii)&(iii) of the Rules.
The issue under consideration is whether the capital gain will be chargeable in case of JDA even if Permissive possession was not handed over to builder during the concerned year?
