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..
Ramanand Industries Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) It is settled proposition of law that even if the books of account are rejected U/s 145(3) of the Act, it would not ipso facto result to an addition except the income estimated on same reasonable and proper basis lead to an addition. In the case in hand, neither […]
Model Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The fact of showing this land in the books of account as stock in trade is not in dispute, however, the ld. CIT(A) has denied the claim on the ground that the assessee has not undertaken any activity which could lead to the inference that the assessee […]
The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by AO u/s 68 of Income tax Act, 1961 is justified in law?
Mathur Lal Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) Conclusion: Deduction under section 54B was allowable only if purchase of new land was made after the transfer of an existing land. Held: Assessee claimed deduction U/s 54B which included purchase of agricultural land on 16/5/2012. AO denied the claim in respect of the agricultural land purchased on 16/5/2012. […]
