ITAT Ahmedabad

No section 68 addition can be made for non-recording of Statement on Oath by mere one Person

Prerna Developers Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Where out of 14 persons, 13 persons have duly confirmed the booking advances made to assessee and their creditworthiness was also examined by AO but no negative inference was drawn by him, no addition could be made under section 68 just because one person who had only advanced an meager amount, had not recorded the statement under oath as...

Read More

Interest on deposit received by Co-Op Bank made in ordinary course of business is Business Income

Anand People Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Anand People Co-op Bank Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) The issue under consideration is that the Income of interest received on advances should be considered as income from other sources or not? The brief facts of the case is that assessee has filed return of income declaring total income at Rs. NIL on 13.10.2015. The […]...

Read More

Section 68 addition justified for unexplained LTCG from penny stock

Bhagwatiben Vinodkumar Surani Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Addition of long-term capital gain against an investor who invested in a penny stock company in connection with the penny stock scam involving Rs. 36,000 Crores was upheld as additions made on account of detailed enquiries being carried out by Kolkata Investigation Directorate with regard to 84 penny stocks company as well as SEBI and no ...

Read More

Reopening Based on change of opinion and in absence of any adverse tangible material was invalid

DCIT Vs Surat Urban Development Authority (SUDA) (ITAT Ahmedabad)

In such cases, assessments can be reopened only if an income assessable to tax has escaped on account of failure of the assessee to disclose all the material facts fully and truly. In other words, the AO has to demonstrate that income of the assessee has escaped assessment on account of its failure to disclose all material facts of the as...

Read More

Agriculture land situated beyond 8 kms is not Capital Asset & Section 50C not applies

DCIT Vs Shri Ravjibhai Manibhai Patel (ITAT Ahmedabad)

DCIT Vs Shri Ravjibhai Manibhai Patel (ITAT Ahmedabad) If an agriculture land is situated beyond 8 kms. from the local limit of any municipal or cantonment area, whose population is more than Rs.10 lakhs, then that would not fall within the ambit of definition ‘capital assets. This demarcation of the geographical situation of the land [...

Read More

Expense on feasibility study for improving day to day working is allowable as revenue expenditure

JCIT (OSD) Vs Adani Logistics Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad)

JCIT (OSD) Vs Adani Logistics Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad) During the course of assessment proceedings the AO observed that the appellant has incurred an amount of Rs. 6,00,00,000/- on account of legal and professional fees paid to one M/s. Emerging India Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. It was further found by the Ld. AO that such expenditure [&he...

Read More

No penalty leviable if finding of AO on bogus purchases was set aside

DCIT Vs Sri Anil J Kothari (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Court concurs with the CIT(A) and the ITAT that once the finding of the AO on bogus purchases was set aside, it could not be said that there was any concealment of facts or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the Assessee that warranted the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act....

Read More

Son’s share in HUF will become property of son’s HUF & father’s share will come to son in his individual capacity

Adhiraj Pranay Shodhan HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

The assessee before us is a HUF. During the relevant previous year, the assessee sold three properties. In the income tax return filed by the assessee, however, only the capital gains on sale of 1/2 of these properties were shown. When the Assessing Officer probed this apparent discrepancy, it was explained that these properties were purc...

Read More

Penalty not levaible on addition made solely based on declaration

Jethanand Khemchand Luhana Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

When no money, bullion, jewellery or book entry was found at the time of search, and only evidence against the assessee is an admission of additional income made in the statement under section 132(4), whether such admission tantamount to disclosure of money, bullion, jewellery or diary and income disclosed is to be considered as concealed...

Read More

Sales bogus if investee is a penny stock company, with no credentials, and the sale rates artificially hiked, with no real buyers

Bhagwatiben Vinodkumar Surani Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

(a) The scrip is a penny stock, purchased at a low price, which is over a period of time ramped up by operators acting in benami names or name lenders. The purchases are off market purchases, and not reported on the exchange; (b) purchase/s is back dated, i.e., per a back dated contract note, paid for in cash, so that there is no trail...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,561)
Company Law (5,619)
Custom Duty (7,678)
DGFT (4,172)
Excise Duty (4,342)
Fema / RBI (4,065)
Finance (4,216)
Income Tax (32,439)
SEBI (3,369)
Service Tax (3,541)