ITAT Chandigarh

No penalty on income on which tax been paid before notice U/s. 148 & disclosed later

Prabhjit Singh Sidhu Vs. Asst. DIT (International Taxation) (ITAT Chandigarh)

Prabhjit Singh Sidhu Vs. Asst. DIT (International Taxation) (ITAT Chandigarh) The facts before us also demonstrate that the disclosure in the return of income filed under section 148 of the Act was voluntary and before detection of the same by the Revenue. The payment of taxes on the said income two months prior to issue […]...

Read More

Advance cannot be treated as deemed dividend if Assessee do not have substantial interest

Roshan Lal Jindal Vs DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh)

The issue in hand pertains to addition made on account of deemed dividend as per provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Being a deeming provision, bringing to tax sums which are not actually in the nature of income but are only deemed to be so, it is to be strictly interpreted. Section 2(22)(e) of […]...

Read More

Understated Sale Value of Agricultural Land to avoid payment of Stamp Duty taxable

The ACIT Vs. Sh. Mohinder Singh (ITAT Chandigarh)

The ACIT Vs. Sh. Mohinder Singh (ITAT Chandigarh) In the case in hand, once both the parties to the transaction i.e. the seller and the purchaser had made to believe not only the public authority but the public at large that the transaction relating to purchase/ sale of land between them was settled at a […]...

Read More

Deduction u/s 80IC cannot be claimed for more than 5 years for units Set Up in specified areas in Himachal Pradesh

M/s Shree Dhanwantri Herbals Vs. DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh)

M/s Shree Dhanwantri Herbals Vs. DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh) Benefit of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act @ 100% was available to new units, only on the setting up of the unit and not on account of substantial expansion undertaken by it. It was further held that there can be only one initial assessment year for […]...

Read More

ITAT found conduct of AO in Tax Recovery case of pre-empting it from dealing with Stay application

Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh)

With this common order we will dispose of the captioned applications of the assessee seeking stay for the recovery of outstanding tax demand for assessment year 2009-10 & 2013-14 respectively. ...

Read More

No Penalty for Disallowance of Debatable and Bonafide claim

The D.C.I.T. Vs. Sh.Vipan Guppta Prop. (ITAT Chandigarh)

DCIT Vs. Sh.Vipan Guppta Prop. (ITAT Chandigarh) We find no infirmity in the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals) in deleting the penalty levied following the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of M/s Hycron Electronics Vs. ITO in ITA No. 326/Chd/2015 relating to assessment year 2009-10. On perusal of the said order we find that [&hell...

Read More

Surplus left after claiming deduction U/s. 54F can be set off against LTCG in succeeding year

S. Baljit Singh Ryait Vs. ITO (ITAT Chandigarh)

A bare reading of sections 54 and 54F of the Act nowhere states that the surplus remaining after claiming deduction under section 54/54F on account of construction of house property undertaken in a year, would not be allowed set off against long-term capital gain earned in the succeeding year. ...

Read More

ITAT explains Principles of mutuality in respect of club managed by HUDA

ITO Vs. Gymkhana Club (ITAT Chandigarh)

The conditions for invoking the principle of mutuality have been recently enumerated by the Apex Court in Bangalore Club's case (supra) wherein after considering various other pronouncements of the Supreme Court and the High Court on the subject, it has been laid down that principle of mutuality relates to the notion that a person cannot ...

Read More

Appeal cannot be dismissed for defect in form without granting Opportunity to cure defect

Haryana State Roads and Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. The D.C.I.T. (ITAT Chandigarh)

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [ITAT], Chandigarh bench, has held that the appellate authority cannot dismiss an appeal by pointing out the defects in its form without granting an opportunity to the assessee to cure the defects....

Read More

AO has no power to review entire assessment order on debatable issues and to make additions in order U/s.154

M/s City Clinic Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITAT Chandigarh)

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the leading case, ITO vs. Volkart Brothers [(1971) 82 ITR 50 (SC)] has held that a mistake apparent on the record must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long drawn process of reasoning on points on which there may conceivably be two opinions....

Read More
Page 1 of 1212345...10...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,651)
Company Law (3,706)
Custom Duty (6,858)
DGFT (3,607)
Excise Duty (4,105)
Fema / RBI (3,406)
Finance (3,623)
Income Tax (26,750)
SEBI (2,837)
Service Tax (3,328)