Armajaro Trading India (P) Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Cochin) In the instant case, one of the reasons for limited scrutiny was for the purpose of examining whether the share application money received by the assessee was genuine and was from disclosed sources. It is seen that the assessee had shown an amount of Rs.2,55,94,110 as […]
ITO Vs Hosdurg Service Cooperative Bank Limited (ITAT Cochin) The CIT(A) had held rental income received by the assessee was not entitled to deduction u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) reads as follows:- “The appellant derived rental income amounting to Rs.24,400/- in A.Y. 2007-08, Rs.21,950/- in A.Y. 2008-09, Rs.16,700/- in […]
Held that the carry forward of business loss cannot be denied to the assessee merely on the ground that the statutory audit/tax audit was not completed within the prescribed period.
Shri Thomas Eapen Vs ITO (ITAT Cochin) The assessee offered income u/s. 44AD, the assessee being a small trader in medicine. There is no dispute that the assessee falls under the provision of sec. 44AD since the turnover of the assessee is less than Rs. 1 crore from eligible business. The Assessing Officer also accepted […]
Kechery Service Co-operative Bank Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Cochin) In the instant case, the Assessing Officer had denied the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the I.T.Act for the reason that assessee was essentially doing the business of banking and disbursement of agricultural loans by the assessee was only minuscule. Therefore, the Assessing Officer concluded […]
Krythium Solutions Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Cochin) The issue under consideration is whether claiming deduction u/s 10A of the Income Tax Act through filing revised return is justified in law? ITAT states that the CBDT Circular No.14 (XL-35) dated 11.04.1955 has clarified that the revenue shall not take advantage of ignorance of the assessee […]
The issue under consideration is whether the AO need to conduct an Inquiry into Factual Situation as to activities of assessee society to determine eligibility of deduction u/s 80P?
The issue under consideration is whether the addition under section 68 is done by AO is justified in law whenm addition was based on third party statements which were retracted by them and Assessee was not given opportunity to cross examine them and when Addition are based merely on Surmises?
Depreciation under section 32 could not be claimed on an undivided share of land as assessee had shown the land separately in the block of assets which was not entitled for depreciation.
Interest income earned from investments with treasuries and banks is part of banking activity of the assessee, and therefore, the said interest income was eligible to be assessed as ‘income from business’ instead of ‘income from other sources’
