ITAT Ahmedabad held that the transaction charges are actually additional cost of funds raised for the purpose of business Hence expenditure incurred on account of the same was wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that in an identical matter, jurisdictional High Court ruled the matter in favour of the assessee, however, later on Apex Court held otherwise. Accordingly, the issue was debatable do to which levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable.
ITAT held that assessee cannot be denied benefit of exemption for which it is entitled merely on the lapse of procedural requirement i.e. delay in filing audit report in prescribed form.
Dashrathbhai Shivabhai Chaudhary Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) The assessee is engaged in farming and trading of milk and seeds. As per the information made available, the assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 21,95,000/- with Saving Bank Account. Being agricultural and the agricultural income is exempt the assessee did not file any return of income under […]
DCIT Vs Crystal Glaze (ITAT Ahmedabad) ITAT considered judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in case of Zirconia Cera Tech Glazes vs. DCIT wherein addition was made only on basis of show cause notice issued by Excise Department against assessee alleging that assessee was engaged in undervaluation of sales and clandestine removal of goods and […]
Simply rejecting on a technical ground amounts to denial of principles of natural justice to the assessee. Therefore, we are remanding back the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication on merit.
Chetankumar Raojibhai Patel Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Sole issue in the present appeal relates to disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Since the assessee has demonstrated the availability of sufficient own funds for the purpose of making interest free funds, the issue, we find, is squarely covered by the decision of […]
In present case approval has been granted by the ld. JCIT without verifying the reasons recorded by the AO for initiating the proceedings under section 147 of the Act which is contrary to the provisions of law.
Smt. Taraben Jayantilal Patel Vs DCIT-CPC (ITAT Ahmedabad) The appellant has computed ‘income from house property’ excluding of service tax whereas in Form 26AS it is inclusive of service tax. The order dated 06.08.2019 upon rectification under Section 154 of the Act, the income under the head ‘income from house property’ was computed at Rs.37,12,839/- […]
Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) It is pertinent to note that the assessee company made provision in Mining Closure Fund as per the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Coal which is mandatory to each mining company. It is not disputed fact that the assessee made claim u/s 43B every year […]
