Shri Hem Raj, Vs. The A.C.I.T (ITAT Chandigarh) The appellant was running liquor, wine and beer shop and was authorized to operate the liquor shop for the period of one year from April, 2007 to March 2008.
ITAT held in Pooja Industries Vs ITO that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) could not be levied only because that the assessee had wrongly claimed deduction u/s 80IC @ 100% instead of deduction u/s 80IB. Penalty could only be levied only
The undisputed facts of the case are that the assessee society does not possess registration under section 12A of the Act for relevant assessment year. From the perusal of return filed by it alongwith Form No.10B shows that it intended to claim exemption under section 11 of the Act
M/s Ved Parkash Contractors Vs. CIT (ITAT Chandigarh) – It is true that the revisional authority itself has wide power to examine the case whether the decision has been erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and in exercise of these power modifications are permissible
ITAT Chandigarh held In the case of M/s GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd vs. The JCIT that it is a settled law that an unascertained liability has to be allowed even if the same is quantified on a future date.
ITAT Chandigarh held in M/s. Ved Parkash Contractors Vs CIT that if the AO had passed brief and cryptic assessment order but had checked and verified all the related documents submitted by the assesse in reply to the questionnaire of the AO
ITAT Chandigarh held In the case of DCIT vs. M/s Smart Value Product & Services Ltd. that no defects in the purchases and sales have been pointed out by the AO. The assessee produced complete books of account, sales and purchase vouchers.
ITO Vs. Shri pardeep Singh Hooda (ITAT Chandigarh) ITAT held that there was no big or unreasonable gap between the amount withdrawn from the bank account and paid for purchase of the property. Since the amount was taken into cashbook after withdrawal from the bank account
M/s Trident Limited vs. The Addl. CIT (ITAT Chandigarh) Assessee company made an investment of Rs. 5038.88 lacs and Rs. 4575.77 Lacs as on 31.03.2006 & 31.03.2007 in various tax free equity funds, from which assessee company gain an dividend of Rs. 46,91,849/-.
In the case of M/s Bhagwati Motors Vs. ITO Chandigarh bench of ITAT have held that Assessee merely acted as a conduit without any right in money, therefore, no addition under section 69A of the Act could be made against the assessee.
