ITAT Delhi

Income from agricultural land supervision is not agricultural income

P.H.I. Seeds (P.) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)

P.H.I. Seeds (P.) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The factual matrix of the present case reveals that the farmer had entered into lease agreement with the assessee company and the farmer is the lawful owner of the land. The said farmers had leased the farm land to the assessee company which has handed it back to […]...

Read More

Penalty u/s 272A(1)(c) can be levied for non-compliance of Section 131(IA)

Young Indian Vs Addl. DIT (Inv.) (ITAT Delhi)

Young Indian Vs ADIT (ITAT Delhi) It is the submission of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the provisions of section 131(1) and provisions of section 131(1A) are different and since the provisions of section 272A(1)(c) prescribe levy of penalty for non-compliance to provisions of section 131(1) only and since there is no provision [&...

Read More

Section 263 order without considering reply of Assessee is invalid

M/s. Great Heights Infratech Pvt. Vs Pr. CIT (ITAT Delhi)

Gauhati High Court in the case of Leela Choudhary vs. CIT 289 ITR 226 held that Order passed under section 263 of the I.T. Act without considering the reply of the assessee would not be valid....

Read More

No Penalty for failure of Third Parties to submit PAN

M/s. Haryana Distillery Limited Vs JCIT, TDS (ITAT Delhi)

Ms. Haryana Distillery Limited Vs JCIT, TDS (ITAT Delhi) Section 272A(2)(k) of the I.T. Act provides penalty for failure to deliver or cause to deliver a copy of the statement within the time specified in sub-section (3) of Section 200 or the proviso to sub-section 3 of Section 206(c) of the I.T. Act. Section 273B […]...

Read More

ITAT confirms addition for Property purchased by Son from Mother (A GPA Holder) for not-explaining source of investment

Nikunj Malik Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Ms. Nikunj Malik  Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) It is well settled law that contents of the registered document cannot be disputed through oral evidence. On the face of the registered sale deed, it is established that assessee made an investment in cash in purchase of property for a sum of Rs.42 lakhs and other amount […]...

Read More

Assessment cannot be made on dead entity

DCIT Vs. NDC Telecommunications India Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)

CIT(A) quashed the reassessment proceedings on the ground that the same has been initiated on a non-existing entity and, therefore, the reassessment proceedings are void ab initio. ...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 272A(1)(c) justified for deliberate defiance by assessee

Young Indian Vs Addl. DIT (Inv.) (ITAT Delhi)

Young Indian Vs Addl. DIT (Inv.) (ITAT Delhi) There was a deliberate defiance on the part of the assessee for non-submission of the same under the pretext that some of the details are available in the records of the Income Tax Department or some of the details are available in the Website of the Ministry of […]...

Read More

ITAT allows Loss due to write off of Investment in Joint Venture

Sahara Global Vision Pvt. Ltd Vs The A.C.I.T (ITAT Delhi)

Sahara Global Vision Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee entered into joint venture by way of participating in a company in USA for distribution of petroleum and chemical products after obtaining approval from RBI. There is also no dispute that the joint venture company in USA was liquidated. The facts on record show that […]...

Read More

S. 147 AO should allow four weeks’ time to assessee after rejection of objections

Smt. Kamlesh Goel Vs The I.T.O (ITAT Delhi)

Smt. Kamlesh Goel Vs The I.T.O (ITAT Delhi) The bone of contention is as to whether the Assessing Officer has rightly framed the impugned order within 16 days of disposing of the objections of the assessee. The answer is given by the coordinate bench in the case of Metaplast Engineering P. Ltd in ITA No. […]...

Read More

Reassessment invalid if notice U/s.143(2) was not issued

ACIT Vs M/s. Dimension Promoters (P) Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)

Where AO had framed the reassessment under section 148 without issuing notice under section 143(2), the reassessment order was invalid because it is mandatory obligation of AO to serve notice by assigning reasons therein with regard to his belief of escaped tax liability before making assessment of any escaped income....

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,863)
Company Law (4,056)
Custom Duty (7,073)
DGFT (3,759)
Excise Duty (4,159)
Fema / RBI (3,527)
Finance (3,732)
Income Tax (28,079)
SEBI (2,948)
Service Tax (3,403)

Featured Posts