Follow Us:

ITAT Kolkata

Assessee cannot be published for its bona fide mistake in registering as local authority instead of AOP

July 8, 2021 1167 Views 0 comment Print

If the assessee by mistake has wrongly registered itself under a wrong category that does not mean that the said mistake is not curable or that the assessee is to be punished for its bona fide mistake

ITAT reprimands officers for delaying tactics during pandemic & rejects adjournment request

May 11, 2021 1902 Views 0 comment Print

DCIT Vs Saroj Kumar Poddar (ITAT Kolkata) Kolkata bench first  of its kind of Interim order on the subject of endless adjournments by revenue on pretext of covid 19  and resultant pains to tax payer languishing for justice held remarkably as follows:- The Revenue is also raising strong objections, without any valid ground, for the […]

Section 54EC deduction eligible if Investment in Bonds within 6 months from Transfer

May 10, 2021 10074 Views 3 comments Print

Sri Pradip Kumar Basu Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) It is observed that the long-term capital gain of Rs.6,14,674/- had arisen to the assessee as a result of residential property sold on 12.06.2013 and in order to claim exemption on account of long-term capital gain under section 54EC of the Act, the assessee was required to […]

Material collected behind the back of assessee, AO must provide opportunity of cross-examination

May 7, 2021 7311 Views 0 comment Print

AO had to confront assessee with the material collected behind the back of assessee, if he chosen to use the material against assessee and that he should provide assessee an opportunity of cross-examination. Not having done so made the evidence in question bad in law.

Bonus, Commission paid to Directors as per Agreements & within company law limits allowable

May 5, 2021 1341 Views 0 comment Print

Hamilton & Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) We note that the payments in question was made to Mrs. Rekha Jalan and Mr. S.K. Jalan, who were directors of the assessee company. These payments were made pursuant to agreements for payment of bonus and commission copies of which were furnished to the Revenue. The payments […]

Gift cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 merely based on doubts

April 30, 2021 1692 Views 0 comment Print

Tapasi Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) It is observed that all the four donors who had given the gifts in question to the assessee during the year under consideration were engaged in the business and in the returns of income filed regularly for the year under consideration, the business income earned by them was duly […]

ITAT allows loss due to Forfeiture of amount paid against Land Purchase

April 22, 2021 1350 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT Vs K.B. Developers (ITAT Kolkata) Sole ground on which the disallowance is made is that the assessee had entered into these agreements, without making solid provisions to raise funds by due dates and hence it does not make any sense for a firm engaged in commercial venture to enter into these agreements. He drew […]

Assessment become void ab-initio if done without issue of section143(2)

April 21, 2021 5859 Views 0 comment Print

Cosmat Traders Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) We hold that the assessment order is bad in law for the reason that the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the assessee, has not issued a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act as required by the statute. Notice issue by the officer having no jurisdiction of the […]

Revision order by CIT invalid if AO taken a possible view that transactions were genuine

April 21, 2021 1500 Views 0 comment Print

Hill Queen Investment (P) Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Kolkata) In this case issue is whether the ld. Pr. CIT is correct in invoking his powers u/s 263 of the Act. In our considered view, the Assessing Officer has called for and verified all the details and documents in connection to the purchase and sale of […]

No revision by CIT on mere ‘Cut & Paste’ reasoning without mind application

April 21, 2021 1635 Views 0 comment Print

CIT could not brand the action of AO to accept the claim of assessee in respect of LTCG as a case of no enquiry on the part of AO to term it as an erroneous order and which finding could have facilitated him to usurp/interfere by exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263. Further, CIT himself ought to have conducted enquiry to bring out the fallacy as to show how the enquiry conducted by the AO was erroneous. Thus, revision was not justified as the impugned order was nothing but cut & paste exercise without application of mind.

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