Chain Singh Mundra Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) In the instant case, the limited dispute relates to whether the assessee has transferred a residential house or not. On perusal of the Sale Deed executed by the assessee, it is noticed that what has been transferred is an industrial plot No.C-10 alongwith construction thereon situated at Sector […]
Electra Paper and Board Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) In the instant case undisputedly on the date of allotment of shares i.e. 31.3.2016, a balance-sheet was drawn by the assessee albeit the said balance sheet was unaudited on that date. The FMV of the shares was determined on the basis of said balance-sheet. The […]
ITAT Chandigarh allows delay in PF payment. Assessee’s Rs. 4,62,844 paid before return filing. Amendments by Finance Act 2021 are prospective, not retrospective.
Smt. Sarabjit Kaur Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) In both the years under consideration, the assessee has declared income from tuition fee in her return of income and in both the years there were cash deposits in the bank account being maintained by the assessee. The Assessing officer added the cash deposits to the income of […]
Sh. Sanjay Jain Vs PCIT (ITAT Chandigarh) In the present set of cases, AO asked the assessees to furnish the relevant details relating to Long Term Capital Gain, Short Term Capital Gain, exemption u/s 10(36) of the Act, deduction u/s 57 of the Act and unsecured loans and the assessees furnished all the relevant documents […]
Neelam Hospital Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) Admittedly and undisputedly, the assessee had filed the appeal before the NFAC beyond the period of limitation and there was a delay of 252 days in filing the appeal. However, it is also undisputed that the NFAC did not adjudicate the appeal of the assessee on merits but dismissed […]
Arjun Yadav Vs DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh) In the instant case, it is not in dispute that employees’ contribution to ESI and PF had been deposited well before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. We further note that though the ld. CIT(A) has not disputed the various decisions […]
Entries relating to advances received from Hardev Singh and his son Maninder Singh Sahi from Canada were recorded in books of account and assessee also explained that amount was received as an advance for making investment in property by said person, and assessee was engaged in the property business. Assessee also requested AO to summon concerned party under section 131 but AO did not accede to the request of assessee and made the addition, therefore, addition made by AO was not justified.
A perusal of the record shows that this allegation of the Ld. Pr. CIT is correct in so far as no query has been raised by the AO on these two issues and neither has the assessee made any submissions either before the AO or even before the Ld. PR. CIT on these two issues even when the said issues were duly mentioned in the show cause notice issued u/s 263 of the Act. Accordingly, we have no option but to uphold the impugned order u/s 263 of the Act on these two issues.
Kamla Retail Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Chandigarh) It is no doubt true that it is incumbent upon the assessee to account for the expenses in respective financial year in which they are incurred or the liability towards such expenses has accrued which is in line with the mercantile system of accounting as well as concept […]
