ITAT Jaipur held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not leviable as addition made on account of meager amount and on account of difference of opinion only.
ITAT Jaipur held that non-compliance due to receipt of notice in SPAM folder is sufficient cause shown for the delay. Accordingly, delay of 223 days in filing of an appeal condoned.
Krishna Das Agarwal Vs DDIT/ADIT (Inv.) (ITAT Jaipur) Black Money Act – Company Is a Separate Legal Entity and The Assessee Cannot Be Held to Be Beneficial Owner Ipso-Facto Due to Majority Shareholding / Directorship.- FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR These bunch of five appeals consist of one appeal filed by the […]
ITAT Jaipur held that there cannot be a second round of penalty for same defaults. Accordingly, penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(b) of Income Tax Act for second time is unsustainable.
Shri Keshoraipatan Sahkari Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Jaipur) We find that the assessment was taken up for scrutiny under CASS to examine the deduction claimed chapter VIA for limited purpose and on this issue, there is finding of the ld. AO in the assessment order. Yet, learned PCIT has subjected the assessment order […]
Voluntary Income declared by assessee on its own i.e. without any detection cannot be considered as equivalent to providing inaccurate particulars of income or concealing particulars of Income
Jagdish Chandra Suwalka Vs JCIT (ITAT Jaipur) ITAT observed that the provisions contained u/s 275(1)(a)are not applicable on the facts of present case for the reason that undisputedly no appeal has been filed against the assessment order passed on 28.12.2017. Therefore, it cannot be said that the relevant assessment or other order was subjected to […]
ITAT Jaipur held that as the activities carried out by the appellant (Rajasthan Para-Medical Council) are not in the nature of trade, commerce or business, hence registration under section 12AA should be granted.
Mahesh Agarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The crux of the issue is that the assessee has filed the appeal manually but simultaneously not filed the appeal electronically. Hence, ld. CIT(A) treated the manual appeal filed by the assessee as non est and dismissed the same. Assessee had already filed the appeal in paper form, however […]
ITAT Jaipur held that officers of DRI are not proper officers for the purposes of Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 and hence order and show cause notice are not maintainable. Accordingly, addition confirmed thereon is unsustainable.