Manibhadra Securities Services P.Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) he assessee in the present case is a private limited company and engaged in the business of trading of Shares and Securities. The assessee in the year under consideration has received the Loan to the tune of Rs. 4,08,01,000/-from M/s Ken Securities Limited. The assessee has repay […]
ITAT Ahmedabad held that loans to staff members is not business expenses and therefore interest earned on such loans cannot be treated as business income.
Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has noticed that assessee has accounted interest expenses twice of Rs. 11.90 crores, therefore, the same was disallowed and also levied penalty of Rs. 1,46,48,271/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the act on the combined amount of disallowance u/s. 14A and […]
In this case AO has not applied his own mind before issuing notice and to arrive at conclusion that assessee has escaped an income and made addition on the basis of report submitted by Investigation Wing. So, Learned AO issued notice purely on borrowed satisfaction. In our considered opinion, in such case addition cannot be made.
Books were never rejected by Assessing Officer and thus business loss cannot be disallowed without taking cognizance of all relevant aspect of matter
Viral Ashish Parikh Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) it is transpired that the assessee can be granted immunity from disallowances of expenses on account of non/short deduction of taxes provided that the assessee (payer) furnishes the certificate in the prescribed form. Thus the onus is upon the assessee. However we find that assessee has not furnished […]
ITAT held that unabsorbed business losses can be set off against any income from business, be it speculative or otherwise.
Held that the mistake in not adding back the loss on sale of fixed assets in computation of income was a bona fide mistake inadvertently. Accordingly, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not imposed.
2 different yardsticks for same set of sale transaction made by co-owners not allowed. Assessee cannot be treated differently for similar transaction
Bilfinger Neo Structo Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) As regards ground relating to Employees Welfare Expenses includible in value of Fringe Benefit Tax, the Ld. AR submitted that the details were properly filed before the Assessing Officer which were never taken into account by the CIT(A) as well as Assessing Officer. Ld. AR further […]
