Follow Us:

ITAT Delhi

Tools, dies, jigs used for Manufacturing eligible for Additional Depreciation

May 2, 2022 11583 Views 0 comment Print

Efacec Switchgear India P. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee submitted that since tools, dies, jigs etc. are used by the appellant for its business of manufacturing switchgear products, the same are plant & machinery. Without these equipments it is not possible for appellant to manufacture switchgear products. Hence, the same are in the nature of […]

AO unjustified in assuming jurisdiction for year not covered in 6 year Block period

May 2, 2022 582 Views 0 comment Print

K.S. Nutrition and Food Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Assessee, inter alia, submitted that the Assessing Officer was not justified in assuming jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the Act in the present case, as the assessment year under consideration does not come within the compass of the block of six assessment years, if it is […]

Section 68 addition by AO without enquiring with AO of Loan Creditor is not justified

April 30, 2022 2898 Views 0 comment Print

GM Overseas Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee, during the course of assessment proceedings has filed various documents substantiating the identity and credit worthiness of the loan creditor and genuineness of the transaction. The assessee has accepted the loan amount of Rs. 4 crores in two tranches i.e., Rs.2,50,00,000/- and Rs.1,50,00,000/- on 05.01.2010 and 11.01.2011 respectively […]

AO Should Specify Proper Limb under Section 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act

April 27, 2022 1986 Views 0 comment Print

Pranav Kumar Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) We have carefully considered the rival submissions made by both the sides and perused the material on record. The issue in the present appeal is with respect to levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In the present appeal, the show cause notice dated 27.11.2017 […]

Supporting evidence cannot be regarded as additional evidence before CIT(A)

April 25, 2022 2286 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT Vs Shri M.K. Ajat Shatru (ITAT Delhi) It has been contended by the revenue that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in admitting additional evidence by way of certificate from the Divisional Commissioner without giving any opportunity to the AO. He submitted that it would be seen from the revenues record itself, i.e. from […]

Section 234B & 234C Interest not leviable on additional income taxable due to unanticipated event

April 24, 2022 5697 Views 0 comment Print

Interest under section 234B and 234C is not leviable since it was not possible for the appellant to anticipate the events that were to take place in the next financial year and pay advance tax on the basis of those anticipated events.

Routine procurement assistance services not amounts to Technical Services

April 24, 2022 1248 Views 0 comment Print

Adidas India Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs National E-Assessment (ITAT Delhi) Facts- Assessee is a company stated to be engaged in distribution and marketing of a range of Adidas and tailor made branded athletic and lifestyle products. Assessee electronically filed its ROI for A.Y 2016-17 on 30.11.2016 declaring total income at Rs. 67,85,52,440/-. The case was […]

Suppression in Net Sales assessable as Business Income & not under Section 68

April 24, 2022 3057 Views 0 comment Print

Income surrendered by assessee is nothing but suppression in net sales and is assessable under the head income from business and cannot be treated as deemed income u/s 68 of the Act.

CIT(A) cannot treat addition made by AO U/s. 69C as made U/s. 69B

April 24, 2022 3585 Views 0 comment Print

M/s Toffee Agricultural Farms Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Coming to the question regarding action of the learned CIT (Appeals) to treat the reference u/s 142 for the purpose of Section 69B, I find merit into the contention of the assessee that there is no power conferred upon the learned CIT(Appeals) to assess a […]

Invocation of section 263 unjustified if order of AO was not erroneous

April 23, 2022 1266 Views 0 comment Print

Since we have already held that the AO has conducted proper enquiry and has taken a plausible view, therefore, the order cannot be held to be erroneous, therefore, in absence of fulfillment of twin conditions, PCIT is not justified in invoking the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the IT Act, 1961.

Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031