Kedar Cotton Industries Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) It is observed that the approval to reopen the assessment in the present case and issue notice under Section 148 of the Act to the assessee was accorded by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax by recording his satisfaction in one word ‘Yes‘ and even the learned DR […]
Explore the Kalpesh Patel vs ITO case at ITAT Ahmedabad. Learn about the technical breach, CIT(A) dismissal, and the ITAT decision to grant an opportunity for e-appeal.
Explore the detailed analysis of ITAT decision in Sports Club of Gujarat Ltd. vs. PCIT case regarding taxability of entrance membership fees and the principle of mutuality.
Explore the case of Bookmywish E-Commerce facing a penalty under Section 271D for accepting cash loans. Detailed analysis of legal perspectives and implications.
Explore the ITAT Ahmedabad decision in Texmat Agencies Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO regarding the upheld penalty for the assessee bogus short-term capital loss claim.
Existence of books of account maintained by assessee was a condition precedent for making addition under section 68. Where assessee had not maintained books of account, there was no legal scope to invoke provisions of section 68 and as such, addition made on such premise was to be deleted.
The assessee received intimation under section 143(1) of the Act from CPC Bengaluru and in the said intimation, certain adjustments were made as regards deduction claimed under section 11(2) of the Act, which according to the assessee have been incorrectly disallowed since assessee case is directly supported by the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Natwarlal Chaudhry Charitable Trust 189 ITR 656 (Cal).
Since there was no valid transfer of land in question by assessee to the partnership firm of M/s. V Developers in the year under consideration giving rise to any capital gain and the transfer of the said land having validly taken place only in the previous year relevant to AY 2012-13 by assessee to M/s. V Developers, the capital gain arising from the said transfer was not chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee for AY 2012-13 as duly declared by assessee in his return of income for AY 2012-13.
Rahul M. Vadodariya Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) ITAT held that Ld. CIT(A) has not approached the matter judiciously and has dismissed the appeal of the assessee, by rejecting the application for condonation of delay, without assigning any specific reasons why the delay in filing appeal should not be condoned. There is no allegation to the […]
Dive into the case of Maninagar Co. Op. Bank Ltd. against DCIT, focusing on the disallowance of depreciation on Govt. Securities. Detailed analysis of the ITAT Ahmedabad’s order for AY 2012-13.
