Addition made under Section 69A for an alleged unexplained cash loan was not justified as assessee provided evidence of receiving the loan through banking channels and not through cash.
Assessee was not liable to deduct TDS under section 194H as relationship between e-commerce platform and assessee was not of an agency but that of two independent parties on principal to principal basis.
Deduction under section 80IA(4) couldn’t be denied solely due to the delayed filing of Form 10CCB, as the audit report was filed before the return was processed.
Lease premium and other charges received by assessee on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra and the ownership of the land remained with the State Government. Assessee’s role was confined to the development and management of industrial areas.
Assessee had satisfactorily explained the source of credits in his books and consequently, CIT(A) had rightly deleted the additions after relying on various judgments made by AO.
ITAT Jodhpur held that if the books of accounts are rejected, and net profit is estimated by application of net profit rate, there cannot be again addition on account of any disallowance based on the same set of books of accounts. Thus, addition u/s. 40(a)(ia) set aside.
ITAT Delhi held that denial of exemption under section 54B of the Income Tax Act for purchase of agricultural land in the name wife of the assessee is not justifiable. Accordingly, denial of benefit of deduction set aside.
ITAT Raipur held that exemption under section 11 and section 12 of the Income Tax Act not admissible to assessee society due to non-furnishing of return of income as required u/s. 12A(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act.
When an assessee deposes on oath giving explanation of the reasons and circumstances for investment, the same could not be brushed aside on the basis of general principles of the modus operandi of bogus LTCG claims.
ITAT Visakhapatnam rules exemption under Section 54F can be claimed even if made after a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
