Urvish B. Mehta Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) “reason to believe”and not “reason to suspect” The undisputed facts are that, the Assessing Officer received information from the DGIT (Inv.) Mumbai who in turn has got the same from the Sales Tax Department. The information was in the form of statements/affidavits which stated that the suppliers admitted […]
An excess claim of depreciation by an assessee for bonafide reasons would not justify imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) had also been deliberated upon by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Somany Evergreen Knits Ltd. (2013) 352 ITR 592 (Bom.)
M/s Eni India Ltd. Vs JCIT (ITAT Delhi) learned AO had taken a view that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ONGC vs CIT & Anr. the nature of activities involved under the contract including the sale of services of HOEC are covered by the provisions of Section […]
Harjeet Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) It can be seen that the Assessing Officer has proceeded on wrong assumption fact. The amount of Rs. 10 lacs is not supported by any cheque number whereas the allegation is that the assessee has received accommodation entry from Sh. Gupta through cheque. In my considered opinion the basis […]
M/s. Shree Ganeshaya Trading Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Delayed pay-in-charges payable by the assessee to sharebroker for making delayed payment of purchase consideration for purchase of shares is infact „interest‟ within meaning of Section 2(28A) of the 1961 Act and the assessee was required to deduct income-tax at source on such interest of […]
DCIT Vs Maco Corporation India (P) Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) There is absolutely no provision for withdrawal of recognition under section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. Hence, the so-called withdrawal of recognition under section 35(1)(ii) in the hands of the payee organizations could not affect the rights and interests of assessee herein for claim of weighted deduction […]
ACIT Vs M/s. Modi Rubber Limited (ITAT Delhi) Disallowance had been made on ad-hoc basis without pointing out any defects in assessee books or vouchers maintained for impugned expenses, and, the same was not, therefore, sustainable. FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 20/01/2014 […]
ACIT Vs Shri Finance (ITAT Delhi) Quantum or total number of transactions may not be determinative but in a given case, keeping in view the period of holding may indicate intention to make investment. We also find that CBDT Circular no. 6 dated 29.02.2016 also comes to the aid of the assessee wherein it has […]
Kirtiman Cements and Packaging Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Provisions of law on unabsorbed deprecation which is allowed as depreciation of current year under section 32(2) fall in section 71 and not under section 72, as such, allowable as ‘business expenditure’. Therefore, unabsorbed depreciation of current year and earlier year was allowable against income […]
ACIT Vs Seema Devi Bansal (ITAT Delhi) Trade and commercial transactions are not covered in the definition of ‘loans and advances’ on which section 2(22)(e) can be applied. When the company got back its funds on the same day, it could not fall into the definition of the deemed dividend. FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT […]
