Nirmala Devi Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Learned Counsel for the Assessee contended that assessee has uploaded the demand notice as well as paid the fees for filing of the appeal which have not been taken into consideration and that only one notice was issued for which date assessee sought adjournment which was also rejected. Therefore, […]
DCIT Vs Expeditors International (India) Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) The grievance of the Revenue is that CIT(A) has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by considering the supplementary TNMM analysis and other documents filed before her and those documents were not made available to AO and secondly on merits, the order of TPO […]
DCIT Vs Morarjee Realities Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) ‘Capital Asset’ as defined in Sec.2(14) would mean property of any kind held by an assessee, whether or not connected with his business or profession’, except those which are specifically excluded in the said section. The only exclusion is only for stock in trade, consumables or raw materials […]
ACIT Vs Fortis Hospitals Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Non compete fee did not confer any exclusive right to carry-on the primary business activity. The right is restricted only to the particular party or individual and does not have the exclusivity over the rest of the world. Thus, non-compete fee cannot be termed as intangible asset. The […]
Merely because tax at source has been deducted by the builder, the receipt of mobilization money cannot be deemed as income of the assessee for the year under consideration. We, therefore, do not find any error in the decision reached by the Ld. CIT (A) in deleting the addition on this count. Finding no merit in this ground raised by the revenue, the same stands rejected.
Admach Auto Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Disposal Of Objection To Reasons In Assessment Order Itself Without Separate Speaking Order Makes Entire Reassessment Invalid We have also gone through the objections dated 27.12.2016 filed by the assessee before the AO in which the assessee has specifically objected the initiation of proceedings u/s. 148 of the […]
Balvinder Kumar Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi) There is no dispute that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny under the category of limited scrutiny. This fact is established from the assessment order and also the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act. CBDT instructions and the letter clearly establish that it’s […]
M/s Boutique International Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Assessment Invalid if Notice Under Section 143(2) Issued by DCIT Instead of ITO if Returned Income Below 30 Lakh as Per CBDT Instruction No.1/2011 for Corporate Assessee We find that assessee filed its return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act on 29.8.2013 and the AO […]
Hindustan Tin Works Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The Explanation -2 has been inserted below the section 37 (1) of the Act with effect from 01/04/2015 i.e. assessment year 2015-16. According to the said Explanation, corporate social responsibility expenditure incurred shall not be deemed to be incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business […]
Where the assessee company demolished the existing structure of building which was situated on the leasehold land, for constructing a new factory, and since there was no other asset in the block of assets, therefore, written down value of the said building claimed as short-term capital loss, was rightly allowed by Commissioner (Appeals).
