Follow Us:

ITAT Jaipur

AO cannot disallow Sum credit in books under Section 68

October 26, 2018 2682 Views 0 comment Print

The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by AO u/s 68 of Income tax Act, 1961 is justified in law?

No deduction u/s 54B if purchase made prior to sale of existing land

October 12, 2018 2988 Views 0 comment Print

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. […]

ITAT condones delay in appeal filing due to fighting with CA

September 19, 2018 1923 Views 0 comment Print

Shri Nitesh Agarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The assessee has explained the reasons for delay as attributable to the various problems on the business front, family front as well as the assessee was having some dispute with his C.A. In support of his explanation, the assessee has filed the record regarding the complaint against the […]

Addition U/s 68 justified on failure to substantiate gift with supportive evidences

September 14, 2018 1149 Views 0 comment Print

Income from undisclosed sources–Addition under section 68–No documentary evidences- As assessee failed to substantiate gift transaction with supportive evidences, AO was justified in making addition under section 68.

Depreciation on JCB cannot be disallowed merely for Delay in Registration

September 14, 2018 2466 Views 0 comment Print

Shri.Ram Karan Yadav Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) There is no dispute that the assessee has purchased the JCB machine vide Invoice dated 3rd June, 2011 and delivery was taken on 6th June, 2011. However, the registration of JCB with the RTO was done on 29.08.2011. We further note that in the registration charges, the RTO […]

Addition for Gift justified on failure to substantiate claim of gift received

September 14, 2018 1209 Views 0 comment Print

Shri Vicky Jethani Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) We note that the assessee has claimed the gift of Rs. 8,00,000/- received from Smt. Poonaj Kanjani stated to be the Aunt of the assessee and non-resident Indian based at UAE. In support of the claim, the assessee has furnished the Bank Certificate of Bank of Baroda regarding […]

Disallowance U/s. 40(a)(ia) for income assessed as Income from other sources

September 13, 2018 3420 Views 0 comment Print

Shri Digamber Jain Bees Panthi Ajmeri Amnay Panchayat Bada Dhada Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) When the income of the assessee has been assessed under the head ‘Income from other sources’ and there is no provision U/s 56 to 58 of the Act to make a disallowance U/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act prior to the amendment […]

S. 40A(3) Validity of Cash payments exceeding limit to Electricity Board

September 4, 2018 2844 Views 0 comment Print

Ayub Ali Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The assessee has entered into an agreement with a Government Hospital in Bikaner whereby it operates the MRI and CT Scan machines. The nature of such activities therefore demand a continuous supply of electricity and the assessee cannot risk the life of the patients especially those admitted in emergency […]

Mere investigation wing report not sufficient to treat a transaction as Bogus

August 29, 2018 2079 Views 0 comment Print

Finding of AO is based merely on suspicion and surmises without any tangible material to show that the assessee has introduced his own unaccounted income in the share of long term capital gain even otherwise the reliance of the statements recorded by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata wherein without giving an opportunity of cross examination is a complete violation of principles of natural justice

Sec. 206C Orders passed after reasonable period are void despite no limitation period

August 29, 2018 2250 Views 0 comment Print

ITO Vs Eid Mohammad Nizamuddin (ITAT Jaipur) A consistent view has been taken by the various Hon’ble High Courts on this issue that when no limitation is provided in the statute then a period of four years is considered as reasonable for passing the order U/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act. The provisions of Section 206C […]

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031