DCIT Vs Esteem Textiles P. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Where AO had framed assessment under section 153C against assessee on basis of a list unearthed pursuant to a search and seizure operation at the premises of a third party, containing name of assessee as an investor, the assessment order was quashed because the said document could […]
Brijesh Jaikishin Rupani Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT Mumbai held that The income offered by assessee in income filed pursuant to issue of notice under section 153A was the income detected during the course of search and seizure operation. The case of assessee was squarely covered by provisions of Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c), because […]
Since assessment originally made was unabated on the date of search and assessment under section 153A was framed without any incriminating material found during the course of search,therefore, the same was not valid.
Claim of deduction accepted by the AO despite unequivocal language of the Act, in our view, is erroneous as contemplated under s. 263 of the Act. Such error on the part of the AO has caused definite prejudice to the interest of the Revenue.
Addition under section 68 on account of bogus shre capital was unjustified as the identity and creditworthiness of share subscribers and genuineness of receipt of share capital stood established and non-production of directors of subscriber companies could not be a sole ground to make addition.
Power of review is not an inherent power but must be conferred by law either specifically or by necessary implication. Courts have consistently held that review proceedings imply those proceedings where a party, as of right, can apply for reconsideration of the matter already decided upon after a fresh hearing on the merits of the controversy between the parties and that such a remedy is available only if provided by the statute.
Where the loans were taken by assessee in cash from his relatives, the transactions between relatives were not in the nature of loans or deposits as envisaged in section 269SS and the penalty imposed under section 271D was accordingly cancelled.
ITAT held that the business receipts of the foreign residents are not taxable in India since the agents have no PE in India and therefore, the assessee was not required to make TDS u/s 195 of the Act. Therefore, the assessee’s appeals for all the three A.Ys are allowed.
Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) Conclusion: Amount paid as compensation by assessee to related company in respect of vacation of property occupied by that company was made after much negotiation and it was thus in accordance with business of assessee and therefore, the same was allowable. Held: During the […]
Provisions of section 56(2)(vii) have application to ‘property’ which is in nature of a capital asset of recipient and, thus, when assessee purchased a piece of land as stock-in-trade, the addition made by AO in respect of the purchase of land by invoking provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii), was to be set aside.
