Janardhan Gupta Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) ITAT find that as emanating from the facts narrated above, the revenue authorities have disallowed the assessee’s claim of cost of purchase and cost of improvement de hors any corroborative evidences. In our considered opinion, there is no infirmity in the orders of the authorities below as onus is […]
South West Drilling and Infrastructure Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) ITGAT find that the facts and circumstances narrate in the order of the authorities below clearly indicate that it is classic case of circuitatious rotation of unaccounted money. The lender has no identity in as much it is nonexistent its sources of credits itself is […]
Harjeet Kaur Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Admittedly, the assessee had deposited cash in her bank accounts during the demonetization period. However, before the Assessing Officer, the assessee had explained that such deposits were out of cash withdrawals made earlier by her for the purpose of her daughter’s marriage. The Assessing Officer has partly accepted assessee’s […]
ITO Vs Logix Buildtech Private Limited (ITAT Delhi) ITAT held that Penal interest arises out of default in payment of installment / lease rent as per the schedule agreed and the normal interest along with penal interest compounded half yearly was agreed to be paid on the default amount and for the default period as […]
Sh. Jasdeep Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has furnished all the vouchers. He submitted that the Assessing Officer remarked that vouchers of Rs.5,31,271/- of Taj Mahal Hotel were not furnished is totally wrong as the same was duly furnished and there is no specific defect pointed […]
As per explanation a to section 56 (2)(viib) of Income Tax Act it has been specifically provided that fair market value of shares shall be based on (1) value determined under rule 11UA or (2) fair market value of under lying assets whichever is higher.
Bhavmeet Singh Bhatia Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) AO noted that the assessee has not filed the return of income for AY 2011-12 whereas the copy of the return of income available in assessee’s paper book clearly reveals that the assessee did file the return of income for AY 2011-12. It is also clearly discernible that […]
It is well settled that no one should be condemned unheard. Therefore, principle of natural justice should be given due consideration while adjudicating the tax dispute.
ITAT Delhi held that locker being in joint names and first name was indicative of real ownership and hence the assessment of the contents of the locker should be rightly done in the hands of the first owner of the locker.
ITAT Delhi held that management fees paid to AE is not chargeable to tax in India in terms with Article 12(4) of India-USA DTAA and hence disallowance of the same u/s 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act for non-deduction of TDS is unsustainable in law.
