ITAT Chandigarh

Limitation period to file a Rectification Application- Computation Date- Order Communication Vs. Passing Date

Shri. Jagmohan Gurbakshish Singh Vs. The DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh)

The Registry has put a note that the applications are time barred by five days. However, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that in view of the settled legal position of law, the applications cannot be treated as time barred. He in this respect has invited our attention to the relevant provisions of section 254(2) of the Income-ta...

Read More

ITAT passes Strictures passed against Dept for showing open defiance of, disrespect of, or of open resentment to, orders of Tribunal

ITO Vs Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Association (ITAT Chandigarh)

This is an application moved by the department for vacation of ad interim stay orders dated 15.2.2017 and 28.4.2017. It has been pleaded in the application that in this case the then concerned Assessing Officer had passed a very well-reasoned order while disallowing the claim of the assessee of exemption u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act....

Read More

Deduction U/s. 80-IC allowed despite Belated filing of return if delay is because of Reasonable cause

Symbiosis Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT (ITAT Chandigarh)

Where assessee filed return within extended period of section 139(4) and delay was caused by reason beyond the control of assessee, liberal interpretation was to be given to procedural requirement of section 80AC and denial of deduction under section 80-IC was not, therefore, justified....

Read More

Section 54 not prescribe any condition vis-a-vis commencement of construction

Paramjit Kaur Vs. Income Tax Officer (ITAT Chandigarh)

The only limitation prescribed by section 54 is that construction of new house ought to have been completed within a period of three years and said section does not prescribe any condition vis-a-vis the commencement of construction, therefore, assessee was entitled to deduction under section 54 even in respect of amount invested prior to ...

Read More

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
Page 1 of 1212345...10...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,724)
Company Law (3,807)
Custom Duty (6,921)
DGFT (3,658)
Excise Duty (4,127)
Fema / RBI (3,449)
Finance (3,656)
Income Tax (27,216)
SEBI (2,882)
Service Tax (3,352)