ITAT held that As reasons given by assessee is not convincing and therefore the delay of 2886 days in filing the above appeal cannot be condoned.
ITAT Hyderabad held that addition towards unexplained investment sustained as assessee couldnt explain the source of investment. Onus is on the assessee to explain the source of investment.
Watermarke Residency Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) In the present case, the TPO had benchmarked the transaction after treating the FCCDs as debt. This finding of TPO was based on Terms of issuance of FCCD and balance-sheets/ financials of the assessee as well as of it’s A.E, where both had mentioned FCCD as debt. We […]
ITAT Hyderabad held that other than being an agriculturist, the assessee was license holder of retail sale of IMFL. However, the said fact was not verified by CIT(A). Accordingly, held that case has not been properly adjudicated by CIT(A).
ITAT Hyderabad held that for comparability of company with that of the assessee, in case of international transactions, the criteria of functionally comparability needs to be considered.
Dy.C.I.T Vs Ashok Developers & Builders Ltd (ITAT Hyderabad) It is an admitted fact that a search & seizure operation took place in the premises of the assessee on 18.02.2016 and certain incriminating documents were found and seized. We find the AO in the order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act determined the […]
DCIT Vs Prabhat Agri Biotech Limited (ITAT Hyderabad) It is a fact that the assessee supplies seeds to its distributors located in the states of Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka and after the season is complete the sales distributors identify the stock of seeds of various varieties which are not sold by the end of […]
Interest on TDS is not interest paid on income tax per se and the disallowance thereof, is unwarranted and interest paid for delayed deposit of TDS cannot be equated to penalty or breach of law.
ITAT Hyderabad held that payment of remuneration to the trustees could result into disallowance of excess expenditure and the same cannot be a ground to cancel the registration of trust
Gayatri Projects Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) A reading of provisions under section 13 and 14 of IBC Code along with decision in Ghanashyam Mishra And Sons, clearly shows that once the proceedings have commenced by institution of application under section 7 or 9 or 10 of the Code, the continuance of the pending proceedings […]
