This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner (Appeals)- 46, Mumbai dated 20-1-2017 for assessment year 2011-12 in the matter of order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act wherein following grounds have been taken by the assessee
Provisions of section 2(22)(e) related to deemed dividend are not applicable where the relevant transactions are in the nature of current account transactions and not loans and advances.
United Education Society Vs JCIT (ITAT Delhi) Undisputedly, the assessee society is registered under section 12A of the Act as a charitable trust engaged in charitable activities for imparting education through its colleges. It is also not in dispute that the assessee society has been claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act on the […]
Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Undisputed facts are, the Assessing Officer by treating the management charges as Head Office expenses has restricted the claim of the assessee to 5% of the total adjusted income in terms of section 44C of the Act. Whereas, learned Commissioner (Appeals) relying upon the order passed […]
Necessary TDS was deducted and it was deposited in the Government Treasury. All these are on record and only there is a technical error that in the challan PAN number of the assessee is mentioned instead of TAN in the relevant column on account of bona-fide mistake, for which assessee should not be penalized or punished when there is no loss to the Revenue.
ACIT Vs M/s. Splendor Landbase Limited (ITAT Delhi) It is seen that section 153A starts with Non obstante clause which inter alia overrides the provisions of section 139. This shows that return filed under section 153A is a separate return. Ld. AR relied upon the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case […]
M/s. Hinduja Group India Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Submission of detailed submitted before AO in summarised & Tabular Form before CIT cannot be considered as submission of any new evidence Power of the appellate authority clearly overrides the provisions of sub-rules (1), (2) and (3) of rule 46A and it is open to the […]
Ms. G. Shoe Exports Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) In this case, admittedly the Tribunal order was passed beyond three months from hearing. No reason whatsoever for the delay has been recorded. As held by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court above, such delay is incurable and even administrative clearance cannot cure the same. As held by […]
M/s. Pratik Syntex Private Ltd Vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) In the instant appeal before us, the inspector was deputed by the AO to make field enquiries who could not locate these three shareholders and the assessee also could not furnish the current addresses of these three new shareholders. These in the instant case before us, […]
It is clear from bare reading of section 143(1) that change of status as done by AO does not fall within any of the clauses thereof. Also, it could not be said that change of status of assessee fell within the meaning of expression ‘an incorrect claim apparent from any information in the return’ as laid down in Explanation (a) to section 143(1). Accordingly, intimation issued under section 143(1) changing the status of assessee was not in accordance with law and AO was, therefore, directed to modify the intimation accepting the return of income as it was.
