The assessee is into development and construction of a project. The case was selected for scrutiny and AO issued notices u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act, calling for certain details.
Addition made under Section 69A for an alleged unexplained cash loan was not justified as assessee provided evidence of receiving the loan through banking channels and not through cash.
ITAT Hyderabad dismisses appeals by Smt. Lekha Reddy Mettu and others regarding capital gains from immovable property transactions. Key judgment details explained.
ITAT Hyderabad remands Sunil Jayantilal Sachdev case for fresh assessment after NFAC confirmed AO’s action without considering taxpayer’s submissions.
AO on perusal of the details submitted by the assessee observed that the assessee could not prove the bad debts written off in its books of accounts are, in fact bad debts and irrecoverable with relevant evidences.
ITAT Hyderabad sets aside CIT(A) order, clarifying that Section 249(4) cannot apply when no advance tax liability exists. Appeal to be reviewed on merits.
ITAT Hyderabad held that benefit of section 115BAB of the Income Tax Act granted even if Form 10ID filed prior to commencement of manufacturing activity, if assessee proves the commencement of manufacturing for the subsequent assessment year.
ITAT Hyderabad held that entire cash deposits added towards unexplained money unjustified since benefit of telescoping of withdrawals against the subsequent deposits should be given. Accordingly, matter remanded back.
ITAT Hyderabad held that condonation of delay of 10 years in filing of an appeal allowed since tax cannot be collected without authority of law and rejection of appeal on technical ground of delayed filing would be contrary to Article 265 of the Constitution.
ITAT Hyderabad condoned delay of nearly a decade in filing of an appeal since tax liability was fastened on the assessee without an authority of law and it is a well settled principle of law that unless authority of law, no tax can be collected.
