The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bangalore bench while dismissing revenues appeal recently ruled that Credit co-operative society engaged in providing credit facilities, etc., to its members is eligible for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
There is no dispute that the search was conducted in the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration therefore the provisions of Section 153C are not applicable for the assessment year under consideration however, the mention of this Section in the order is only a mistake which is covered under the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act.
ACIT Vs Shri Dilip Ranjrekar (ITAT Bangalore) It was held that despite the non completion of the construction of the new property by the builder, the assessee would be entitled to the benefit of exemption u/s 54 of the Act. We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record. It […]
It was urged that the letting out of space to Infosys BPO Ltd. and BSNL at Chennai were therefore incidental to the business carried on by the assessee and therefore eligible for deduction under Section 10A of the Act.
M/s. Google India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) The present stay petition is filed seeking further extension of the stay of demand. Admittedly there is change of the circumstances from the first stay order, since this Tribunal had disposed of the appeal involving identical issue for earlier years against the assessee. Therefore, the principle […]
A co-operative society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, which is not having a banking license from the RBI to carry on the business of banking, cannot be deemed to be a co-operative bank coming within the ambit of section 80P(4) of the Act.
If the gift is invalid then the assessee is not even owner of any property and therefore, no question arises for making addition in the hands of the assessee in respect of that property which is not even owned by the assessee and in that case also, addition if any may be made in the hands of the donor if the donor is not able to explain the source of investment.
Question of rectification of mistake cannot be entertained until and unless the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the assessee is found to be maintainable. The miscellaneous petitions filed by the assessee are beyond the period of 6 months from 1-6-2016 and therefore the same are barred by limitation.
The learned Commissioner (A) ought to have appreciated that the return of income was filed electronically within the due date and filing of ITR-V was a formality and delay in filing ITR-V cannot deprive the assessee from claiming carry forward loss duly determined for the relevant assessment yeare.
The appellant has admitted in his sworn statement about this undisclosed income, has filed the return of income showing the same as his income & has paid the necessary taxes on this. From the case laws mentioned above, it is clear that on similar facts of the case, penalty u/s 271AAA has been cancelled. Therefore, humbly following the case laws as cited supra, the penalty u/s 271AAA is cancelled.
