Jurisdiction of ITAT Bench which can decide appeal is to be determined by location of Assessing Officer. Since, location of AO in instant proceeding is at Mumbai, the appeals, should have been filed before Mumbai Benches and not in Delhi Benches.
ITAT Delhi held that that expenditure incurred between setting up and commencement of business could not have been capitalized and was to be allowed as business expenditure.
If in the initial year of claim the depreciation, is allowed, the claim cannot be disturbed in the subsequent years
Assessee must be informed of grounds of penalty proceedings through statutory notice and an omnibus notice suffers from vice of vagueness
Section 199 of Income-tax Act r.w. rule 37BA(3) provide that credit of TDS shall be given for assessment year for which income is assessable
ITAT held that in this case disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act has not been found from the books of accounts of the assessee. Rather the plea is that the suppliers have not maintained proper books of accounts.
Conclusion: Issue regarding claim of depreciation could not be decided until dispute regarding capitalization of expenses in assessment order was decided. Therefore, the same was restored to the file of CIT(A) with the direction to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee,
ITAT Delhi supports household savings explanation for cash deposits up to Rs.2.50 lakh, referencing CBDT Instruction and prior rulings.
Addition u/s 43B on account of External Development Charges (EDC) not paid to HUDA before due date of filing return of income not justified
ITAT Delhi held that if in the initial year of claim the depreciation, is allowed, the claim cannot be disturbed in the subsequent years.
