In a crucial decision, ITAT Delhi rules in favor of Nimit Kumar Aneja, allowing depreciation under section 32. Analysis of the case and its implications for carry-forward of WDV.
It is not open to the First Appellate Authority i.e., CIT(A) to set aside the order of the A.O. and order a remand or to give any directions. Hence, CIT(A) was not justified in giving direction to the A.O. to levy penalty u/s. 271AAA of the I.T. Act, 1961.
ITAT held that where notice u/s 148 was not served on the assessee in accordance with law the reassessment made consequent thereto was without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. In the case on hand as the Revenue could not prove the service of notice u/s 148 on the assessee in accordance with law the re-assessment made u/s 147 read with section 144 pursuant to such notice is void ab initio and bad in law.
Deduction reduced on account of interpretative process cannot per se be equated with furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.
Detailed analysis of Sh. Jai Parkash Garg Vs PCIT case at ITAT Delhi. AO enquiry, PCIT jurisdiction, and conclusion discussed. Appeal allowed on 14/06/2022.
Assessee has challenged the imposition of penalty under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act for non deduction of tax at source as per provisions of Chapter XVII-B towards amount paid as External Development Charges (EDC) to Directorate of Town and Country Planning, Haryana (Haryana Government) (DGTCP) through banking channel favouring Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA).
Explore the ACIT Vs Zodiac Transport case as ITAT Delhi directs fresh adjudication on protective additions, influenced by the SVP Group entities recent partial relief.
ITAT Delhi decision in ACIT vs. Foot Mart Retail clarifies that liabilities, outstanding for years, not written off, cannot be added under section 41(1). Detailed analysis of the case.
Bank guarantee commission cannot be said to be a commission as intended to u/s 194H of the but it is in the nature of Bank charges charged by the bank for provision of services to the assessee. TDS not deductible.
Explore the ITAT Delhi ruling in Garg Acrylics Ltd case. Detailed analysis of alleged bogus purchases, challenges to statement validity, and successful reversal of unjustified additions.
