ITAT Kolkata

Penalty for Failure to get accounts audited cannot be levied if books not maintained

Somnath Ghosh Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)

Assessee assailed the imposition of penalty under section 271B imposed by AO on account of failure to get accounts audited under section 44AB. Assessee contended that penalty was not justified as no books of account were maintained by assessee....

Read More

Requirement of issuance of notice within prescribed time U/s. 143(2)

ITO Vs Globsyn Technologies Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata)

ITO Vs Globsyn Technologies Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata)  is the contention of the ld. AR is that no notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was served within the stipulated time prescribed in the Act and the reassessment order was without jurisdiction and prayed to dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue. Further he submitted that the […]...

Read More

Retrospective amendment in section 9(1)(vi) cannot override India-Ireland DTAA

Ixia Technologies International Ltd. Vs ACIT(IT) (ITAT Kolkata)

Ixia Technologies International Ltd. Vs ACIT(IT) (ITAT Kolkata) Since assessee`s case is covered by beneficial provisions of the India-Ireland DTAA, hence the retrospective amendment made in the provisions of section 9(1)(vi) of the Act, which provides that royalty would include consideration for transfer of all or any rights in respect o...

Read More

Addition cannot be made by merely relying on 26AS

Mercury Car Rentals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

Mercury Car Rentals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) During the course of assessment proceeding, the AO observed that assessee failed to reconcile interest income to the extent of Rs.67,939/- with its books of accounts and therefore added back the said amount as undisclosed interest income of the appellant as shown in the Form 26AS. [&hel...

Read More

Long-term capital loss on listed shares eligible for set-off against taxable income

M/s. United Investments Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata)

M/s. United Investments Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) In this case the assessee had incurred loss on sale of shares after paying STT & these shares were held on investment a/c for period more than 12 months. The assessee claimed that the loss incurred was to be assessed under the head ‘capital gains’ and its set […]...

Read More

No addition u/s 68 for bogus LTCG without substantial evidence

L. K. Prahladka, HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)

Since assessee had brought all the relevant material to substantiate its claim that transactions of the purchase and sale of shares were genuine and AO had brought nothing controverting material to deny the same, therefore, the long term capital gain (LTCG) on sale of shares of M/s. KAFL claimed as exempt by assessee could not be treated ...

Read More

LTCG from penny stocks cannot be treated as bogus if documentation is in order and no fault found by AO

Chandra Prakash Jhunjhunwala Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

Chandra Prakash Jhunjhunwala Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT The captioned appeal filed by the Assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2014-15, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-21, Kolkata, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer ...

Read More

Document which is already on file of AO cannot be treated as additional evidence

DCIT Vs Ashok Walia (ITAT Kolkata)

DCIT Vs Ashok Walia (ITAT Kolkata) As far the second limb of Assessing Officer’s grievance, i.e. against the admission of additional evidence by way of admitting a copy of acknowledgment of the return dated 31.07.2008, we find that this contention is also devoid of legally sustainable merits. A document which is already on the file [&he...

Read More

Penalty cannot be levied for mere filing of Form No. 3CB instead of Form 3CA

M/s. PMC Rubber Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata)

M/s. PMC Rubber Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) We note that the assessee has filed form no. 3CD and 3CB and the same has not been disputed therefore the tax audit report was on record and hence the penalty should not be levied. However the Assessing Officer disputed that instead of form […]...

Read More

Section 54F Exemption cannot be denied if assessee invests entire consideration in construction of residential house

Vijay Mahipal v. ITO (ITAT Kolkata)

Vijay Mahipal v. ITO (ITAT Kolkata) If the assessee invests the entire consideration in construction of the residential house within three years from the date of transfer he cannot be denied deduction u/s 54F of the Act on the ground that he did not deposit the said amount in capital gain account scheme before the […]...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,348)
Company Law (5,132)
Custom Duty (7,473)
DGFT (4,037)
Excise Duty (4,273)
Fema / RBI (3,884)
Finance (4,044)
Income Tax (31,119)
SEBI (3,230)
Service Tax (3,477)