Aroshi Jain Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Circular No.03/2017 dated 21.02.2017 provides that no further clarification or verification is required to be made in a case of an individual when the deposited amount during demonetization period is upto Rs. 2,50,000/-. In the present case, the assessee who is a housewife having no other source of income […]
ITAT Delhi held that eligible deduction under section 11 of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied merely on the basis of technicalities.
Sharad Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) It is seen from the record that the lower authorities have been disputing the factum of Will. It is also undisputed fact that in the Will there is no specific mention relating to weight and description of such jewellery which was being bequeathed by the testator. However, it […]
ITAT Delhi held that deriving Arm’s Length Price without resorting to any method prescribed as per the Income Tax Rules is unjustifiable. Accordingly, TPO/ AO directed to determine Arm’s Length Price.
Isolux Corsan Power Concession India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) In this case AO has treated Interest income as Income from other sources as Business of Assessee was not set-up in the year under consideration and held as follows:- In the present case, the appellant has miserably failed to demonstrate that during the year […]
Shangri-La International Hotel Management Pte Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) The next common issue arising for consideration is taxability of reimbursement of expenses as FTS both under the provisions of the Act as well as India-Singapore DTAA. As could be seen from the draft assessment order, alleging that the assessee did not provide the break up […]
Merely filing of the affidavit is not sufficient to prove the capacity and source of the persons who has given money to the assessee.
ITAT Delhi held that expense on Social & Rural Development Programme are revenue in nature, accordingly, allowable under section 37
ITAT Delhi held that expenditure towards clinical trial incurred solely and exclusively for the business purpose is allowable expenditure.
ITAT held that if a Penalty notice is vague then penalty proceedings initiated under section 271(1)(c) on that basis were vitiate
