Read the full text of the ITAT Ahmedabad order regarding the penalty under Section 271 in the case of Harson Labs Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT for Assessment Year 2015-16.
ITAT Ahmedabad clarifies cash deposit source issue in Karan Realty Pvt Ltd vs. ITO case. Analysis of assessment and capital gains matters.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules that penalties under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act cannot be imposed on loans transacted through banking channels. Details and analysis.
Assessee has appealed against an order passed by CIT(A) and subsequent addition. Learn more about Capital Gain cannot be treated as bogus without giving reasons.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the assessee (pharmaceutical company) is not entitled for claiming deduction under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act on account of freebies given to the doctors.
ITAT acknowledged that individuals like the appellant, often women with limited income sources, should be spared from the strenuous process of income tax assessments, especially when dealing with small amounts.
Land sold by assessee was agricultural Land and did not qualify as capital asset in terms of Section 2(14)(iii) as it was subsequent to purchase of land, its use was changed to non-agriculture purpose, therefore, the capital gain earned on the piece of land as not being liable to tax.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules on the treatment of cash receipts from sale of gold/gold ornaments in case of Abhishek Prakashchand Chhajed Vs ITO.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that gratuity premium paid to LIC was to be treated as business expenditure and the same is allowable under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Learn about Shell Global Solutions International BV vs. DCIT case. Non-residents providing services outside India for foreign clients aren’t subject to Section 9 tax.
