Sponsored
    Follow Us:

ITAT Delhi

Unsecured Loan from relatives cannot be equated with Bank Loan

January 10, 2019 9531 Views 0 comment Print

Hon’ble Delhi ITAT held that there is difference between loan taken from Banks and unsecured loans taken from the relatives. In the case of unsecured loans from the relatives, no formalities and bank guarantee have to be given. Thus the Hon’ble Tribunal has held 15% interest paid on unsecured loans taken as highly reasonable.

HUF cannot be a partner in partnership firm; Belated return cannot be revised

January 9, 2019 43209 Views 1 comment Print

Ajay Kumar Gupta (HUF) Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer has rightly invoked section 154 because the assessee wanted to take benefit of the notification issued by the CBDT. In the present case, as per judicial precedents, the HUF itself cannot become a partner in the partnership firm and as […]

Remuneration to partners not allowable if Assessee fails to comply with section 184(2)

January 9, 2019 3477 Views 0 comment Print

MART Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) The issue in dispute before us in respect of remuneration given to the partners, which has been disallowed in terms of section 185 of the Act, which says that “if a firm does not comply with the provisions of section 184 of the Act for any assessment year, then no […]

Expense incurred by Trust for private parent company outside India not allowable

January 9, 2019 852 Views 0 comment Print

M/s. Escorts Cardiac Disease Hospital Society Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Assessee is not running any hospital towards which this expense has been incurred. The assessee just conducted a seminar for the benefit of its parent body i.e. Escorts Hospital, which is a private company. The expense has been incurred outside India and therefore, it is a […]

Income / Losses declared by Investor Companies not a Sole Criterion to examine Creditworthiness

January 4, 2019 912 Views 0 comment Print

Psychotropics Leasing & Finance (P) Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The ld. CIT(A) appears to have stressed on the fact that the impugned share holders has shown meager income in their return of income. In our opinion, the income/losses declared by the investor companies is not a sole criterion to examine the creditworthiness of the […]

Third part statement cannot be relied if No Opportunity for Cross-Examination was given

January 3, 2019 2883 Views 0 comment Print

Rajat Exports Import (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The AO noted in the assessment order that the DIT (Inv.) in the course of investigation in the case of Shri Mukesh Gupta, Shri Rajan Jassal and Shri Surinder Pal Singh recorded their statements. The assessee was supplied with the seized material at the fag […]

Gain on sale of Shares held for more than 12 months as investment is LTCG

January 3, 2019 2199 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT Vs M/s. Wig Investment (ITAT Delhi) AO has treated not only the gain on mutual funds as business income but also gain on profit and sale of shares as also as business income. Now in view of the CBDT Circular dated 29.9.2016, if shares are held for more than 12 months which have been […]

Document related to transactions recorded in books cannot be considered as incriminating material

December 28, 2018 2073 Views 0 comment Print

Advocate Akhilesh Kumar Sah Lord Krishna Dwellers (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Lord Krishna Dwellers case: Purchases of land reflected in the seized sale deeds duly recorded in the regular books of account, documents seized relating to same during the course of search cannot be considered as incriminating material, enabling AO to proceed under section […]

AO has no jurisdiction when reasons for initiation of Reassessment proceedings cease to survive

December 27, 2018 1326 Views 0 comment Print

ITO Vs Aggregate Finance & Investment P. Ltd (ITAT Delhi) Be that as it may, as adverted to supra, the case of the Ld. AO while recording the reasons was that the assessee derived the income as a provider of bogus accommodation entries. However, the addition was made on account of receipt of share application […]

No penalty for mere non-reflection of Income surrendered voluntarily in ITR

December 25, 2018 3156 Views 0 comment Print

Where assessee had already paid income-tax on the amount surrendered during the course of survey, it could not be said that the surrendered income was not voluntary and the assessee wanted to conceal the income, therefore, imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified.

Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031