ITAT Bangalore directed authorities not to dismiss rectification application u/s. 154 on the ground of limitation as the assessee was erroneously misled to deposit taxes and it is settled law that no tax can be collected without authority of law.
ITAT Bangalore directs AO to reconsider 80P deduction after lower authorities overlooked Supreme Court precedents in Arjuna Souhardha Pathina Sahakari Niyamitha case.
It was held that assessee to provide concrete evidence establishing the genuineness of the cash deposits in accordance with CBDT Circular wherein the various instructions had been issued by CBDT dated 21.2.2017, 3.3.2017, 15.11.2017 & 9.8.2019.
Vide the present appeal, the assessee has challenged only two issues regarding disallowance of Rs. 1,99,291 towards motor car & Rs.29,345 on motor bikes; and adhoc disallowance towards salary, rent, machine charges & bonus.
ITAT Bangalore held that the co-operative societies providing credit facilities to its members is entitled to deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act. Thus, income earned on account of providing credit facilities is allowable as deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i).
Assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A) with a delay of about 133 days in filing the appeal. However, CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by not condoning the delay and without adjudicating the issues on merits. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
ITAT Bangalore in the case of cash deposit during demonetization period directed assessee to file KYC of the depositors and accordingly directed AO to verify the same and allow if found in order.
Assessee filed his original income tax return on 31-08-2019 and revised the return on 19-06-2020. He submitted Form 67 to claim the foreign tax credit but AO denied the FTC claim due to the late filing of Form 67.
Liability to capital gains had not arisen in the assessment year 2017-18 as occupancy certificate was received on 01/02/2017 for commercial portion and 17/03/2017 for residential portion but in the assessment year 2018-19 on receipt of possession.
ITAT Bangalore held that confirmation not containing PAN cannot be reason for addition as the confirmations were available with the AO and if he had any doubt regarding he could have again verified with the creditors. Addition in respect of creditors deleted.
