Held that provisions of section 23(1)(c) are applicable when the property was let out for two or more years, however, was vacant for the whole previous year. Accordingly, income tax on rental income on a notional base doesn’t apply.
It is an admitted position that the alleged expenses incurred by the Assessee were business expenses of the company and therefore no personal benefit accrues to the Assessee as alleged by the authorities below. Hence, this Section 2(22)(e) of Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be invoked by alleging that Assessee had benefitted.
ACIT Vs Smt. Shobhakaver Surana (ITAT Chennai) It could very well be seen that the assessee is a trading concern. It has maintained category-wise stock details which has been valued at average cost. The assessee is subjected to Tax Audit which contain quantitative details and well valuation of stock under each category. There is no evidence […]
P.S.K. Engineering –Construction & Co. Vs ADIT (ITAT Chennai) ITAT have perused the entire order but could not understand from the order whether opportunity was granted to the assessee before denying the deduction u/s.80IA of the Act. The ld.DR could not answer whether opportunity was granted or not. Every quasi-judicial order has to be a […]
ITAT held that no disallowance of expenses can be made in respect of exempt income by invoking the provisions of s. 14A of the Act r/w Rule 8D of the Rules while computing book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act.
Assessee is facilitating the poor people to access to housing credit, which otherwise would not be available to them due to mortgage requirements etc. The only source of funding for the assessee is borrowings and the donations are almost negligible. In such a case, the activity is nothing but a mere-lending activity.
Undisputed facts that emerge are that assessee has ceased its business operations and leased out factory building and Plant & Machinery to one lessee under two separate agreements.
Appeal dismissed for technical lapse as Legal heir did not register himself as representative assessee along with PAN of deceased assessee
Held that provision of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) cannot be invoked unless the recipient of loan is a shareholder of the company. If recipient of loan is not shareholder in a company from which loan is received, such loan cannot be assessed as deemed divided.
Held that the claim of loss accruing or arising as investment in equity shares, non-convertible debentures and zero coupon redeemable preference shares is not capital loss but eligible for deduction in computation of business loss
