This appeal by assessee under section 253 of income tax act is directed against the order of Director of Income tax (Exemptions) Mumbai, dated 22 November 2011 for assessment year 2009-10. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal
In ‘CIT vs. Chandra Narain Chaudhri’ (supra), it was also held that the Stamp Valuation Authority does not take into consideration the attributes of the property, such as encumbrance, for determining the fair market value in case, as in the present one, it is offered for sale and is purchased.
Section 69B cannot be invoked on the assumption that there was understatement of the investment, without a finding that the assessee invested more than what was recorded in the books of account.
ACIT Vs Development Board (ITAT Ahmedabad) The central question involved in the present appeal is whether the expression ‘in any other case’ occurring in section 244A(1)(b) of the Act would include interest on an amount of refund resulted from reversal of excess interest charged under s.234B of the Act. As per Income Tax computation form […]
ITO Vs Shri Basavaraj M Kudarikannur (ITAT Bangalore) We have considered the submissions of the ld. DR. It is not disputed by the AO that the land acquired was agricultural land and the conditions laid down u/s. 10(37)(i) to (iv) are applicable to the land which is in question which was compulsorily acquired. It is […]
The ld. counsel vehemently stated that the legislative intent in prohibiting the acceptance and repayment of money in cash over and above Rs. 20,000/- is to check the unaccounted money and not to hit the genuine business need.
Assessee made no offence prohibited by law which can be contemplated to be covered under Explanation to section 37 of the Act and, therefore, the payment of penalty made by the assessee to the Stock Exchange is a regular business expenditure and the impugned disallowance has rightly been deleted by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-13, Bengaluru [CIT(A)] dated 21/06/2017 for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2013-14.
ACIT Vs M/s Calcutta Export Co. (ITAT Kolkata) The Revenue has failed to place on record even a single document throwing light towards the fact that the payee herein has rendered any of its services in India thereby making it liable to be assessed u/s 9 r.w.s 5 of the Act. The assessee’s payee has […]
DCIT(E) Vs GS 1 India Assessee is a society involved in importing, developing and distributing of Bar code technology to be used by various manufacturers and industries which is for the general benefit of public at large. However, during the scrutiny of the return of income of the assessee for the AY 2011-12, AO made […]
