Held that the Revenue has failed to comply to the direction of the Bench in furnishing any report from the AO as to in what manner, the investigation carried out by the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata and report of SEBI has any link with the transactions carried out by the assessee, we allow the claim of Long Term Capital Gain on account of sale of shares of M/s Esteem Bio Organic Food Processing Ltd. and consequently the exemption claimed u/s 10(38) of the Act.
Pavel Garg Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Annual value of house property cannot be determined on ad-hoc basis when rent realized by assessee in subsequent years is on record ITAT finds that the AO has computed 10% of the value of investments in house property whereas the ld. CIT(A) reduced the amount to 5% of the […]
ACIT Vs Ravi Parkash Aggarwal (ITAT Delhi) Primarily, we find that the reasons recorded by the assessee are too sketchy and does not instill any confidence with regard to the reasons recorded for reopening. It is not even clear whether the assessee has received entries pertaining to loans or purchases. The details of the report […]
Vishnu Kumar Garg Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) We find the A.O. in the instant case made an addition of Rs.12 lakhs to the total income of the assessee under section 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 on the basis of entries dated 07.07.2010 and 07.08.2010 found as per Page-14 of Annexure-A1. We find the Ld. […]
ITO Vs Cozy Footwear Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Here in this case, the assessee company has received share application money from three parties. Two of them were Directors and one was a corporate entity M/s Omexpo Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. In so far as the share application money received from Directors, the AO has held the […]
Smt. Lata Garg Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Facts- The assessee is an individual and derived income from salary, income from house property, income from business or profession and income from other sources. It was alleged that there were certain bogus purchases. Accordingly, AO alleged adding the same to the total income of the assessee. Conclusion- […]
Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Ld. Counsel for assessee contended that AO has wrongly made addition of the cash deposit in the bank account u/s 69 of the Act. We do not agree with the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee because assessee made a cash deposit of the impugned amount […]
We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. We find that the interest levied u/s 234B of the Act was deleted by the DRP relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of GE Packaged Power 373 ITR 65 in which the Hon’ble High Court followed the decision in the case of Agence France Press 2015-TII-14-HC-DEL-Intl. From the scrutiny report, on DRP’s directions, the AO has accepted the deletion. But since the matter is subjudice before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, these appeals have been preferred.
Hapur Pilkhuwa Development Authority Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Learned CIT(A) has not allowed the benefit of excess utilization of earlier years, claimed by the assessee by raising additional ground. Ld. AR for the assessee contended that this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the order passed by coordinate Bench of Tribunal […]
No reason is assigned for not following Rule of Consistency. The Revenue is under legal obligation to be consistent in its approach regarding taxability of any item. It cannot be purely on the whims and fancies of the Assessing Officer.
