ACIT Vs. Claridges Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Company can claim Depreciation in respect of Equipment Installed at Residential Premises of its Managing Director, the same should be added as perquisite in the hands of the said Director but cannot be disallowed in the hands of the assessee company
M/s Sharmilee Furnishing P. Ltd Vs. I.T.O (ITAT Delhi) There is no dispute to the fact that the department conducted inquiry in the case of third party where the name of the assessee was also written to have received accommodation entry and accordingly, the AO reached to a conclusion while recording reasons that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment and it is a fit case for initiation of proceedings u/s 148 of the Act and the case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was made by making necessary additions.
Unless return of income already filed is disposed of, notice under section 148, cannot be issued, i.e., no reassessment proceedings can be initiated so long as assessment proceedings pending on the basis of the return already filed are not terminated.
Advocate Akhilesh Kumar Sah ACIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. (Delhi ITAT) Mercantile based accounting requires income and expenditure of a financial year has to be taken in account in the same, concerned financial year. In ACIT vs. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. & vice versa [ITA Nos. 5246, 5247, 5248, 5249 and 5286/Del/2012, […]
M/s. Bokaro Power Supply Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi) In the case of Swadeshi Cotton Mills Vs. CIT Ltd. (supra) the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that, ‘where the amount paid is partly penal and partly compensatory, the amount to the extent that it is compensatory could be allowed as deduction’. Further, Hon’ble Jurisdictional […]
it has been submitted that assessment proceedings before the AO were earlier being taken care of by the tax counsel, who, however, stopped attending the proceedings without intimating the assessee as differences had developed between the assessee and the counsel.
The contract of guarantee does not give any rise to principal – agent relationship between the assessee and the bank and, therefore, the consideration received by the bank on account of guarantee commission cannot be reckoned as commission as contemplated under section 194H and accordingly, there was no requirement to deduct TDS on this payment.
Explore the ITAT Delhi’s decision on Anant Concrete Products Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO, highlighting jurisdictional issues in the reassessment process. Learn how the lack of proper jurisdiction impacts the validity of re-assessment.
While deleting an addition made in respect of undisclosed income, the Delhi bench of the ITAT held that the gift received by the assessee cannot be treated as non-genuine merely for the reason that the family members of the assessee had received bogus gifts during the same year.
Even if a subsidy is given to attract industrial investment or expansion, which is a otherwise a capital receipt under the pre- amendment era, shall be treated as income chargeable to tax, except where it has been taken into account for determining the actual cost of assets in terms of Explanation 10 to section 43(1) of the Act.
