Addl. CIT Vs G.S. Pharmbutor P. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) It is undisputed fact that the assessee has not given any loan or advances during the year. As can be seen from the copy of account of M/s. Moderate Leasing & Capital Services Limited, assessee has been paying advances and loan to the said company from […]
DCIT Vs Futurz Next Services Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) In the instant case it is an admitted fact that the assessee is not a member of any exchange and cannot execute Client Code Modifications (CCM) and the transactions on account of CCM done by the group concerns are not found to be false or untrue and […]
Arun Duggal Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Brief facts of the case are that information has been received from investigation division of the Income Tax department with regard to the two bank accounts maintained by the assessee which have not been disclosed to the Income Tax Department. Based on the information received, the Assessing Officer having […]
Whether licenses fee which give assessee company long term right to use telecommunication spectrum and the annual extension of the same be considered as capital expenditures
Abhinav Agarwal Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Snapshot of Basic modus of providing bogus LTCG 1. Merger of Unlisted companies with Listed Entity: This is the most preferred option for the persons willing to operate for the purpose of doing Long Term capital Gains. In case of the mergers with listed companies, the merger petition has […]
A.O. has not made any addition/disallowance on those two counts for which the case was selected for limited scrutiny, but he has made certain additions on an issue which was not the subject matter of limited scrutiny and there is nothing on record to suggest that the A.O. has taken necessary approval from the PCIT/CIT for converting the limited scrutiny to full scrutiny. Therefore, on this issue also the A.O. is not justified in making the disallowance of interest expenditure.
Aesthetica Enterprises P. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) In this case nature of default committed by the assessee is not known as the inappropriate portion in the relevant column of the show cause notice has not been struck off. Consequently, the Assessing Officer himself was unsure of the category under which the default is blamed […]
For a mere verification of the claim, the power of re-opening of the assessment could not be exercised and it further held that AO under the guise of power to re-open the assessment cannot seek to undertake an undertaking a fishing or roving inquiry or seek to verify the claim as if he is the scrutiny officer.
YKM Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) We find that, out of total expenses of Rs.10,96,510/- on the travelling and conveyance, a sum of Rs.7,99,769/- was incurred on booking of tickets and remaining for boarding and lodging, which is evident from the details given in the paper book at page 2. For booking of […]
Sans any adverse material, AO cannot question the wisdom and business expectancy in which wake of such evidences and record which has been duly appreciated and taken note of by the ld. CIT (A).
