Penalty u/s.271E was not leviable as the belief of assessee that return of advance from customers was not prohibited by section 269T was a bonafide belief....

The provisions of section 68 cannot be applied to sundry creditors and the assessee cannot be applied to sundry creditors and the assessee cannot be asked to prove the 3 ingredients of cash credits in respect of sundry creditors....

Das & Sons Infracon Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Cuttack) amount claimed on payment of PF and ESI having been deposited on or before due date of filing of returns, same could not be disallowed under section 43B or under section 36(1)(va). FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT This is an appeal filed by the […]...

M/s. Sree Alankar Vs PCIT (ITAT Cuttack) In the instant case, we find that it is not in dispute that the assessee is consistently following the same method of valuation of closing stock which was also followed in the year under consideration. The profit was deduced in accordance with the method adopted by the assessee. […]...

ITO Vs Adhikar (ITAT Cuttack) In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the assessee is engaged in the activity of Micro Finance. The Assessing Officer considered the same as non-charitable activity within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act on the ground that the activities were carried out on commercial lines. […]...

Panda Fuels Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack) We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower authorities and materials available on record. In the instant case the Assessing Officer disallowed deduction for remuneration paid to partners of Rs.6,64,923/- on the ground that the partnership deed does not provide for remuneration to par...

When amendment made U/s. 200A of Income Tax Act which has come into effect on 1.6.2015 is held to be having prospective effect, no computation of fee for the demand or the intimation for the fee under Section 234E could be made for the TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 1.6.2015....

 M/s. Orison Transport Vs DCIT (ITAT Cuttack) Belief of the assessee that return of advance from customers is not prohibited by section 269T was a bonafide belief. Therefore, the levy of penalty u/s.271E of the Act of Rs.21,49,943/- cannot be sustained. FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT This is an appeal filed by the assessee against [&hel...

Xavier Institute of Management Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack) The Cuttack bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the income received by a charitable institution imparting education shall not be charged for receiving training and consultancy fee from corporates as the same cannot be treated as a ‘commercial activity’ fo...

Hemant Kumar Pradhan Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack) Original assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was made by the AO by rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee and estimating the income of the assessee at 8% of the gross contract receipt of Rs. 49,10,212/-. It is trite law that once the books of accounts of […]...