Sponsored
    Follow Us:

ITAT Jaipur

Additions for unexplained cash cannot be made solely based on section 132(4) statements

September 15, 2020 3594 Views 0 comment Print

Jewels Emporium Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) From the record, we found that as on the date of search, the books of account of M/s Jewels Emporium were incomplete and the printouts of cash books as taken by the search team did not reflect the true and correct balance available which is made part of the […]

Addition for Bonus shares – Section 56(2)(vii)- ITAT explains Law

September 15, 2020 3900 Views 0 comment Print

DCIT Vs Veena Goyal (ITAT Jaipur) As per the provisions of the section 56(2)(vii)(c)(i), any property other than immovable property is transferred for a consideration which is less than the aggregate fair market value of the property by an amount exceeding Rs. 50000/-, the aggregate fair market value of such property as exceeds such consideration […]

Differential Sales Tax paid for non-deposit of forms is allowable as deduction

September 15, 2020 3918 Views 0 comment Print

Gem Electro Mechanicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) Since there was delay in depositing the aforesaid amount of sales tax, therefore, the assessee was made to deposit interest amounting to Rs. 2,71,826/- on such delayed payment of sales tax amount and Rs. 3,152/-on delayed payment of Excise/Custom Duty & Service Tax. The AO during […]

In case of unaccounted sales only profit therefrom can be taxed

September 15, 2020 10455 Views 1 comment Print

Nawal Kishore Soni Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) It is evident from entries found in cash book of Ram Kumar Soni and from statement recorded from assessee in course of survey that assessee purchased gold in period of demonetization which was obviously for sale to persons on receiving cash from them as the same is normal […]

Income already disclosed under PMGKY, 2016 cannot be treated as Unexplained Income u/s 68

September 15, 2020 1071 Views 0 comment Print

The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of unexplained investment in purchase of gold?

AO cannot treat Share Premium as Bogus without proper investigation

September 14, 2020 1971 Views 0 comment Print

ITO Vs. Aravali Prime Consultants Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Jaipur) In this case, it is noted that the AO during the course of assessment proceeding made the addition of Rs. 2,63,15,000/- (138500 shares x Rs. 190 per share) on account of share premium received on issue of shares by the assessee company. Thus the AO observed […]

Section 271(1)(c) penalty cannot be levied on additions based on estimate

September 14, 2020 13875 Views 0 comment Print

Vishnu Tambi Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur) Under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the authority has been given discretion to levy the penalty in case there is a concealment of particulars of income and also with regard to quantum of penalty. However, it is a basic need of the provisions of law that definite finding is […]

Amount taxed in the head of related entities, cannot be taxed in the hand of Appellant

September 14, 2020 870 Views 0 comment Print

DCIT Vs Jugal Kishore Garg (Derewala) (ITAT Jaipur) The ld. CIT(A) observed that it is evident that the surplus being referred to by the Ld. AO is not profit from the projects but the receipts of ‘on money’ credited to the capital accounts of the partners which has been considered in the additional income offered […]

Invocation of Section 263 to initiate Penalty proceeding not sustainable when addition itself deleted by ITAT

September 11, 2020 549 Views 0 comment Print

Agencies Rajasthan Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Jaipur) Invocation of Section 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961 to initiate Penalty proceeding not sustainable when addition itself deleted by ITAT Brief facts of the case are that assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 30-12-2017 by the AO and thus the AO made the […]

ITAT condones delay due to misplacement of Order by tax consultant

September 11, 2020 1116 Views 0 comment Print

Satish Kumar Garg Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur) ITAT held that misplacing of CIT(A) order by regular tax consultant is not deliberated delay on part of assessee and it should be condoned. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay in filing the present appeal by 31 days. In this regard, the ld. […]

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
February 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728