Fabline Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) This appeal preferred by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) – 7, Kolkata dated 28-02-2018 passed ex parte, whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. 2. The assessee in the present case is a company, which is engaged […]
Rashmi Jalan Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) Penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271AAB is bad in law as the showcause notice issued by the Assessing Officer does not specify the charge/s against the assessee for levy of penalty, as required by law. Thus, on this ground, the penalty is quashed. Even otherwise, […]
Amendment in section 37(1) of the Act has been introduced w.e.f. 1st April, 2015 and does not apply on the facts of the case and the disabling provision as stated in Explanation 2 to section 37(1) refers only to such corporate social responsibility expenditure as u/s. 135 of the Companies Act, 2013
Supertron Electronics Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) The admitted fact is that no notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee for both the assessment years. Only a notice u/s 148 and Section 143(2)(1) of the Act was issued. Under these circumstances we have to hold that the assessment orders for […]
Budhia Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) Learned authorized representative vehemently contends that the impugned deemed dividend addition is not sustainable in the eyes of law. His case as per page 4 of the paper-book indicating the assessee’s ledger in the books of M/s Republic Tractor Motor Pvt. Ltd. is that it had been […]
Where case of assessee was selected for limited scrutiny on issue of mismatch of sales shown in the audit report vis-à-vis tax return but AO expanded the scope of limited scrutiny by making addition for alleged speculation loss under section 43(5) without taking permission from the concerned Pr.CIT/CIT, order of AO was set aside.
ITO Vs Trilokpati Exim Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) When assessee had allotted shares for consideration other than cash then provisions of section 68 (cash credit) does not apply FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to assessment year 2012-13, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner […]
ITAT states that, anyhow disallowing 10% of the expenditure on the ground that profit leakage has to be plugged cannot be supported. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, some disallowance of a random amount of 5 lakhs, in our view, would meet the end of justice. In the result, the balance disallowance is deleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part.
The issue under consideration is whether ex parte order passed by CIT(A) because of non attendance of assessee on the date of hearing is justified in law?
Second revision u/s 263 quashed by ITAT holding not permissible on the same subject matter on which specific direction given by First PCIT have been complied by AO. Doctrine of merger applied.
