AO was duty bound to provide opportunity of cross-examination of witness, if he relied on statement of such witness to decide against assessee, particularly when it was demanded by assessee. Illegality crept in, the moment request for cross-examination was denied.
ACIT Vs Setco Automobiles (ITAT Ahmedabad) In the present case, the issue is about allowability of product development expenses which were held by A.O. be a capital in nature. We find that ld. CIT(A) while deciding the appeal for A.Y. 2002-03 and following it has given a finding that due to incurring of product development […]
DCIT Vs Shri Rajamannar Thennati (ITAT Ahmedabad) The assessee was employed with Sun Pharma Advance Research Co. Ltd. as whole time director of the company with maximum salary of Rs. 3.5 crores as per the resolution passed in the annual general meeting of the company dated 31st July, 2012. Since there was limit for payment […]
DCIT Vs Rajamannar Thennati (ITAT Ahmedabad) The assessee was employed with Sun Pharma Advance Research Co. Ltd. as whole time director of the company with maximum salary of Rs. 3.5 crores as per the resolution passed in the annual general meeting of the company dated 31st July, 2012. Since there was limit for payment of […]
Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Board Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) The AO during the assessment proceedings has made the disallowance of Rs.50.85 crores in determining the income under normal computation of income under the provisions of Section 14A read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rule. The AO made the addition of the same disallowance while […]
Urmin Marketing P.Ltd. Now known as Unicorn Packaging LLP Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Scheme of the amalgamation can be approved under the provisions of section 2(1B) of the Act where shareholders holding not less than 75% in the value of shares of the amalgamating company become the shareholders of the amalgamated […]
B. P. Patel and Co. Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) It is elementary to say that the ‘satisfaction’ can only be formed by the person who is competent to impose penalty and not a lower ranking authority. The law provides for imposition of penalty by an officer of the rank of the Joint Commissioner. Thus, the […]
The issue under consideration is whether deduction can be claimed under Research and Development (R&D) for Amount incurred towards development on a mechanism to produce customised products?
Ashokbhai Chinubhai Bharwad Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) The assessee has shown his share of sale consideration at Rs.81.00 lakhs being 25% share. The AO further found that sub-Registrar, Ahmedabad City Taluka had valued the property for the purpose of stamp duty payment at Rs.5,24,83,000/- as against sale consideration shown by the assessee at Rs.3,24,00,000/-. Therefore, […]
whether the CIT (A) is correct in confirming addition u/s 145A of the Act to closing stock for unutilized Cenvat credit in respect of credit inputs or capital goods purchased?
