M/s Balaji Health Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) Conclusion: Reopening of assessment by AO on basis of report of Investigation Wing that assessee was beneficiary of accommodation entries in the form of share capital/premium/loan during the financial year was not justified as AO had not carried out any further examination and analysis in […]
Irrespective of the period to which the quarterly return pertains, where the return is filed after 1.6.2015, the AO can levy fee under section 234E of the Act.
Charan Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) (i) Under Section 148 of the Act, the issue of notice to the Assessee and service of such notice upon the Assessee are jurisdictional requirements that must be mandatorily complied with. They are not mere procedural requirements. (ii) For the AO to exercise jurisdiction to reopen an assessment, notice […]
As assessee had duly proved source of cash deposit in her bank account to be opening cash balance and gift from her parents, no addition could be made under section 68.
The limited point of dispute is the nature of immovable property which has been purchased by the assessee. The assessee’s contention is that which he has purchased are three plots of agricultural land and the same doesn’t fall in the definition of capital asset as per the provisions of Section 2(14) of the Act and provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) cannot be invoked.
ITAT held that order of the ld CIT(A) is hereby affirmed where he has held the assessee bank to be assessee in default for short-deduction of TDS on LFC/LTC claim relating to foreign leg of the travel of its employees being not eligible for exemption under section 10(5) r/w Rule 2B.
M/s. ASK Partners Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The interest paid by the firm and claimed as deduction is simultaneously susceptible to tax in the hands of its respective partners in the same manner. In the same vain, the firm is merely a compendium of its partners and its partners do not have separate legal personalities under […]
Since assessee had a reasonable cause for non-deduction of TDS, penalty u/s 271C not leviable in terms of section 273B.
Shri Rahul Singhal Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 02/07/2018 of ld. CIT (A)-3, Jaipur for the A.Y. 2014-14. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The impugned additions and disallowances made in the order U/s 143(3) of the Act dated 29/12/2016 are bad […]
Once assessee had undisputedly not filed the return of income U/s 139(1) then AO was well within his powers and jurisdiction to issue a notice U/s 142(1) requiring assessee to furnish return of income in the prescribed form and verified in prescribed manner, therefore, the notice issued u/s 142(1) was well within the framework of procedure for assessment provided under Chapter (xiv) and and notice could not be held to be invalid on account of mere mentioning of an unnecessary section therein, i.e., section 153A..
