ITAT Ahmedabad partially upholds CIT(A)’s decision on TCS collection under Section 206C. Analysis focuses on Form 27C delays, procedural compliance, and tax implications.
ITAT Mumbai held that where two houses joint together constitutes a single unit for residence, then exemption under section 54F of the Income Tax Act would be available to such joint residential house.
Addition of unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 was unjustified as all the above transactions were duly recorded in the books of account and there was no undisclosed cash credit involved in these transactions.
ITAT Bangalore held that penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act not leviable in terms of section 273B of the Income Tax Act since claim of exemption u/s. 54 is made in an open and bonafide manner.
Upon further examination of the assessee’s bank statements, the Assessing Officer observed that significant funds were being transferred in and out to various parties.
The assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of retail milk selling. For the relevant AY 2012-13, the assessee did not originally file a return of income, as the total income was below the basic exemption limit under the Act.
ITAT Delhi held that assessment order under section 153A of the Income Tax Act quashed as assessment has been framed not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act is liable to be set aside since advance was received was merely recorded as journal entry and no sum was received by the assessee. Thus, appeal allowed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act not justified since the amount introduced by way of unsecured loans proved to be genuine. Accordingly, disallowance of interest deleted.
ITAT Lucknow rules that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed for disallowance of Section 80P deduction due to legitimate, disclosed claims.
