Action Construction Equipment Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The Assessing Officer has not given any reason as to why he dropped the penalty in Assessment Year 2010-11 and sustained the imposition of penalty for Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10 under the same set of facts. Moreover, in the impugned penalty order, the Assessing Officer has stated […]
IT support services availed by assessee-Indian company from foreign companies were standard connectivity and networking services could not be termed as technical services within the meaning of Section 9(1)(vii) and therefore, assessee was not liable to deduct TDS on such expenditures.
ICRW Group Gratuity Trust Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITAT Delhi) No denial of registration u/s 12AA to ICRW only because it benefited restricted group of employees unless full enquiry was made Conclusion: Registration under section 12AA could not be denied to assessee-trust merely because it was for the benefit of a restricted group of employees as […]
ESPN Star Sports Mauritius Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Facts- The appellant is a partnership firm established under Mauritius Law. It is engaged in the business of selling advertisement time and programme sponsorship from Mauritius in connection with the programming via non-standard television on ESPN, Star Sports and Star Cricket programming services. During the year under […]
If a person adopts the provisions of section 44AD and declares income @ 8% of the turnover, then the assessee is not required to maintain the books of account as provided for under section 44AA in respect of business covered under the presumptive taxation scheme of section 44AD.
PCIT was not justified in assuming the jurisdiction under section 263 when the case of assessee which was selected for limited scrutiny was never converted to full scrutiny and assessee had submitted all the details as called for by AO from time to time for the reasons for which the case was selected for limited scrutiny.
Madan Mohan Tiwari Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Once information received by AO were shown in objections as incorrect, entire jurisdiction on such reasons cease to exist and thus reopening should be dropped. Such non application of mind therefore at recording reasons as well as disposal of objections invalidate entire reopening. FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER […]
CIT had power to correct an error, which was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in the order of AO, even if it was approved by the Joint Commissioner, who was also falling below the rank of the Pr. Commissioner. Whatever was to be excluded by the law had already been provided under that Section and the only exception were the issues ‘decided and considered’ in the appellate orders.
JNS Instruments Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi) The Commissioner can regard the order as erroneous on the ground that in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Officer should have made further inquiries before accepting the statements made by the assessee in his return.The reason is obvious. The position and function of the Income Tax […]
Once the transaction is found to be recorded in the regular books of account, provisions of section 69 do not apply and the CIT(A) had, therefore, rightly deleted the addition which calls for no interference.
