Section 50C will get attracted only when there exists difference on the sale consideration and assessed value for the purpose of stamp duty by the authority of a state government. Where there is no material evidence that the assessee had received more than the fixed component from the developer,
ITAT Hyderabad held In the case of Shri Mohd. Imran Baig & others vs. ITO that it is now settled in favour of the assessee by the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeev Lal and Smt. Shantilal Motilal V/s. CIT (365 ITR 389)
The ITAT Hyderabad in the case of Shri G. Mahesh Babu vs. DCIT held that if any material gathered by AO proposed to be utilized in the course of assessment proceedings then it is the duty of AO to inform the assessee about the same and provide an opportunity to be heard.
ITAT Hyderabad upholds AMD R&D’s plea on depreciation impact in transfer pricing. Infosys, L&T, Mindtree excluded. Get insights into the ruling.
In the case of S.L. Shiva Raj Vs. DCIT Hyderabad Bench of ITAT uphold the penalty order by holding that the penalty is levied with reference to original return of income and not with reference to the assessment made consequent to the disclosure by assessee.
ITAT Hyderabad held in M/s DQ Entertainment (International) Ltd Vs ACIT that if the effect of expenses has been given in the balance sheet then the upward TP adjustment could not be made because the same had not been charged to P&L account and so same could not be be added to the income of the assessee.
M/s. Kamineni Educational Society vs. Joint DIT (Exemptions)-Issue- The common issue involved in these appeals is about the disallowance of depreciation claimed by assessee in respective assessment years on the reason that the cost of assets had been claimed as application of income by assessee
ITAT Hyderabad held In the case of M/s. KNR Constructions Ltd. vs. DCIT that no such adverse inference however was drawn by the A.O. in the case of the concerned two sub-contractors and in the assessments completed under section 143(3) in their cases
Smt. Shakeera Begum vs. ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) In the instant case, as the municipal approvals, completion certificates and authentic plans were not available, the ITAT could not conclude whether assessee had constructed new independent house and there was no evidence that the old building was ever demolished.
In the case of Pegasystems Worldwide India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT Hyderabad Bench of ITAT directed the AO to reduce communication cost not only from export turnover but also from the total turnover for the purpose of computation of deduction as per Explanation 2 to section 10A.
