Sponsored
    Follow Us:

ITAT Hyderabad

In assessment proceedings pursuant to order under section 263 assessee cannot seek to show that there was some other benefit in favour of revenue which was prejudicial to interest of assessee

May 14, 2010 751 Views 0 comment Print

Only in the cases where the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue and not prejudicial to the interest of the assessee can be reopened under section 263 and the assessee is not eligible to claim any new benefit in the assessment proceedings pursuant to section 263.

Only when assessee is able to offer reasonable explanation, based on some evidence, Assessing Officer cannot invoke Part B of Explanation to section 271(1)(c)

May 14, 2010 774 Views 0 comment Print

Where the assessee is not able to substantiate his claim of expenditure with any evidence, penalty is leviable under section 271(1)(c)

Tax on Income from building let out with other assets

April 30, 2010 3217 Views 0 comment Print

Where the assessee as the owner of the building was only exploiting the property as owner by letting out the same and realizing income by way of rent, such rental income was liable to be assessed under the head `income from house property’

If a Municipality is not notified by the Central Government, the agricultural land falling therein cannot be treated as capital asset by taking the distance from the limits of other Municipality

April 23, 2010 42387 Views 0 comment Print

Since Rajendra Nagar Municipality is not notified by the Central Government, the agricultural land falling therein cannot be treated as capital asset by taking the distance from the limits of Hyderabad Municipality.

Penalty cannot be levied u/s 271D for receiving cash from borrower by a lender in violation of section 269SS

March 19, 2010 2254 Views 0 comment Print

In our opinion, the Section 269SS and 271D are not applicable to the fact of the case since the assessee in this case received back the money in cash and not advanced money or accepted the loan in cash. The penalty In this case cannot be levied u/s 271D of the Act. for receiving the cash from the borrower, by the assessee.

Assessee-employer not hit by retrospective insertion of Explanation 1 to section 17(2) in absence of any such extension of retrospective effect either in section 192 or section 201

December 3, 2009 387 Views 0 comment Print

These four appeals by the assessee for the assessment years 2004- 05 to 2007- 08 are directed against the common order of the CIT (A). Since an identical issue is involved in all these appeals preferred by the assessee, these are being disposed off with this consolidated order.

Once estimation of income is made, further disallowances u/s. 40(a)(ia) are not warranted

October 23, 2009 10804 Views 0 comment Print

Where income of the assessee having been determined by resorting to estimation, there is no scope for any further disallowance either in terms of section 40(a)(ia)/40A(3) or otherwise.

Revised return which is a defective return filed under any of the provisions of the IT Act can be rectified

June 19, 2009 16488 Views 3 comments Print

The first issue is taken up first for consideration. Section 139(5) permits the assessee to file a revised return on discovery of an omission or any wrong statement in the original return. Of course, only such return can be revised which has been filed under section 139 (1) or which has been filed pursuant to notice under section 142 (1).

True character of receipt in the hands of assessee can not be judged by utilization thereof

June 19, 2009 483 Views 0 comment Print

We have duly considered the rival contentions and the material on record. The crux of the matter is to determine the true character of the receipt in the hands of the assessee and not the utilization thereof. The utilization will not determine the nature of the receipt. The assessee may mis-utilise the funds but that will not either determine or change the character of the receipt. The foremost thing to be appreciated is that the assessee has taken

Discount can not be treated as brokerage or commission u/s. 194H in the absence of existence the relationship of principal and agent

February 26, 2009 1004 Views 0 comment Print

We have carefully considered the submissions of the rival parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the facts are not in dispute. Under section 194H of the Act any person not being an individual or a Hindu undivided family who is responsible for paying on or after the first day of June 2001 to a resident any income by way of commission or brokerage, shall, at the time of credit of such income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment of such income i

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
February 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728