The assessee is a contractor who is involved in the construction of roads, bridges, runways and tunnels etc. The assessee is also engaged in the business of operating petrol bunks, cinema theatres and manufacture of blue metals and ready-mix concrete.
The difference in the fair market value and the issue price of compulsory convertible preference shares was only 0.65%, therefore as per Rule 11UA issue price was deemed to be fair market value and hence no scope for addition required to be made u/s. 56(2)(viib).
Assessee challenged the disallowance before the Chennai bench of ITAT arguing that the disallowance of Rs. 134.25 crore under Section 14A was excessive and not justified because only Rs. 74.98 lakh had been spent to earn the exempt income.
ITAT Chennai held that interest earned out of savings bank account maintained in a co-operative bank cannot be treated as income or dividend from investment and accordingly deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act not eligible.
ITAT Chennai held that approval of large number of cases in a single day cannot be reason for faulting reopening of assessment since the case was reopened u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act after due application of mind.
ITAT Chennai held that salary received for international assignment which is subjected to tax in UK could not be taxed in India. Accordingly, claim of the assessee allowed. The assessee being non-resident individual filed return of income declaring income of Rs.2295/- and claiming refund of Rs.10.08 Lacs.
ITAT Chennai held that cash received under unregistered will accepted as will furnished by the assessee not established as fabricated one by the department and there is no requirement in law to get the will registered.
ITAT held that disallowances based on estimations do not constitute underreporting of income and thus are not grounds for a penalty under Section 270A.
ITAT Chennai held that failure to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income Tax Act after issuing notice u/s. 147 and prior to finalizing the re-assessment vitiated the entire proceedings. Accordingly, order quashed.
ITAT Chennai held that no findings have been rendered on various documentary evidences furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, matter restored in view of violation of the principle of natural justice.
