ITAT Cuttack

Section 43B not applies to provisions of section 36(1)(va) in respect of employees contribution

Nirakar Security & Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack)

SC held that the provisions of section 43B would not apply to the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the Act in respect of employees contribution....

Read More

Delayed payment in respect of employees contribution to PF & ESI is not allowable

BBG Metal Syndicate Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Cuttack)

BBG Metal Syndicate Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Cuttack) Admittedly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd(supra) has categorically held that the employees contribution to PF and ESI to the extent it is not paid within due date prescribed under the PF Act, is not allowable u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act. […]...

Read More

What is scrap for one person could be a useful product for another – TCS not deductible

Balaji Build Tech Vs ITO (TDS) (ITAT Cuttack)

In case of the assessee itself if we take the presumption that what the assessee has purchased from RSP is only scrap then he would be selling the same to some other steel manufacturing plant. However, the sales are retail sales. This itself shows that what has been sold by the assessee is not scrap but usable products....

Read More

Expenditure of pay revision as approved is allowable

DCIT Vs Orissa State Co -op.Milk Producers Federation Ltd (ITAT Cuttack)

ITAT Cuttack held that scientific method of calculation is done and the pay revision is approved, hence the provision for the pay revision is an unascertained liability nor the liability does not crystalise....

Read More

Addition by CIT(A) on fresh issues without enhancement notice not valid

Paradeep Paribahan (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Cuttack)

Paradeep Paribahan (P) Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Cuttack) The Assessing Officer in the course of original assessment proceedings has made additions only in respect of TCS on the sale of minerals and the addition on account of non-deduction of TDS in respect of interest on borrowed capital paid by the assessee to NBFC. Admittedly, the […]...

Read More

ITAT imposes Cost of Rs. 5,000 for Non-Compliance of Notice issued by CIT(A) via ITBA

Subhag Projects Private Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack)

Subhag Projects Private Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack) A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that four opportunities have been granted to the assessee by issuing notices through ITBA System via e-Mail. It was submitted by the ld. AR that notices have been received but the assessee was unable to correspond with […]...

Read More

No Section 271F penalty when Assessee having 2 PAN filed return under anyone PAN

Sudhi Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack)

Sudhi Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack) Assessee has filed her return of income at one place i.e. at Kolkata under her PAN A****2218B and the transactions done under PAN A****6846F are also duly reported and disclosed in the said return of income. No doubt has been shown by the revenue authorities on this contention of […]...

Read More

Trust not registered U/s 12AA- AO directed to allow expenditure & Tax Surplus

Joharimal High School Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack)

Joharimal High School Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack) Undisputedly rather admittedly, the assessee does not enjoy registration u/s.12AA of the Act and as per e-return filed before the Bench, as per column 3, the assessee has shown receipt of income of Rs.97,10,521/- and as per column 4(i), amount applied during the previous year or expenditure incu...

Read More

ITAT quashes section 263 order as no addition made on  issues raised in Section 263 proceedings

Ravi Metallics Limited Vs PCIT (ITAT Cuttack)

Ravi Metallics Limited Vs PCIT (ITAT Cuttack) A perusal of the order of the ld. Pr.CIT shows that the show cause notice issued u/s.263 of the Act has been issues only on 1st March, 2019. Admittedly, the assessee has responded to the show cause notice though on 26.03.2019. In the said reply, the assessee has […]...

Read More

Multiple Flats not linked to each other cannot be treated as Single Residential House

Jayashree Sahoo Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack)

It was the submission that assessee has acquired multiple units and, therefore, the assessee is not entitled to claim of exemption u/s. 54F ...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,180)
Company Law (8,632)
Corporate Law (10,966)
Custom Duty (9,597)
DGFT (4,888)
Excise Duty (4,932)
Fema / RBI (5,349)
Finance (5,765)
Income Tax (43,214)
SEBI (4,665)
Service Tax (4,095)

Search Posts by Date

December 2022
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031