ITAT Mumbai rules on Radiant Life Care’s appeal against disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act. Key interpretation of Rule 8D(2)(ii) discussed.
ITAT Mumbai rules CBDT notification cannot deny S. 80IB(10) deduction to SRA projects approved before 01/04/2004, citing legislative intent.
ITAT Mumbai held that exercising revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act by PCIT on the basis of factual misconception is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, appeal allowed and order u/s. 263 quashed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Hence, revisionary jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act not justifiable as twin pre-conditions not satisfied.
Interest paid on late payment of TDS was not an expenditure wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of business and further it was a payment, which was in the form of tax, so it was not an allowable expenditure.
ITAT Delhi allows India Thermit Corporation’s appeal, ruling that scrutiny assessment under Section 143(2) bars summary processing under Section 143(1).
Assessee had consistently shown the plots as investments in earlier years and that the nature of income could not be determined solely based on the nature of the business for tax audit purposes.
In pursuance of search, notice u/s.153A was issued and in response, assessee also filed its return of income. AO noted that assessee had taken loan from four parties during the years under consideration.
Assessee had strongly contended that he was unaware of who Shri Kaustubh Latke and Shri Shailesh Patil are, since they were not connected with him or Rucha Group.
