Gouranga Cement Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) It is undisputed fact that the assessee has the earned the long term capital income by way of transfer of the business assets such as factory building, Plant & Machinery, electric installation under the head slum sale. Thus the nature of LTCG is in the nature of […]
Explanation 3C to section 43B provides that interest payable can only be allowed to an assessee when the same is actually paid and any interest which has been converted into a loan shall not be deemed to have been actually paid.
DCIT Vs M/s Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) We come to Revenue’s appeal. Its sole grievance reads that the CIT(A) has erred in law and as facts in allowing arrears Section 80IB and 80IC deduction claims totaling to Rs. 1,39,48,12,000/- thereby reversing Assessing Officer’s action not taking any cognizance thereof solely for the reason […]
Appellant was prevented by sufficient cause not to let out this property. Therefore, the Notional Income from the said property lying vacant due to Act of Government cannot be added back.
Vague information given by DIT (inv) there is no other material the AO collected after preliminary enquiry which could have enabled him at the time of recording reasons to come to a conscious independent conclusion that income of the assessee has escaped assessment.
Gautam Jhunjhunwala Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) in the light of the definition of ‘transfer’ as defined u/s. 2(47) of the Act it is clear that when any right in respect of any capital assets is extinguished and that right is transferred to someone, it would amount to transfer of a capital asset. In the light […]
Rahul Kheria Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) The commission claimed to have been paid to under section 133(6) to M/s Jessop and Co and we note that the said Jessop replied to the notice. The AO however doubted the reply by Jessop on the ground it was a reputed company so the logo in the letter-head […]
Where after setting off interest earned against the interest expenditure no further interest expense remains, then disallowance could not be made under section 14A.
Gautam Jhunjhunwala Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) In order to avail the benefit of sec. 54 of the Act, one must purchase a residential house/new asset within one year before or two years after the date on which transfer of the old residential house in respect of which the long term capital gain had arisen. In […]
Rajesh Agarwal Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. The first contention raised by the learned counsel for the assessee in support of the assessee’s case is that the gross receipts of his business as declared by the assessee in […]
