DCIT Vs Ambuja Neotia Holdings Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT find that the notice u/s 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) dated 13.08.2015 has been issued in a mechanical manner and in standard format without mentioning one of the two limbs on which the penalty was proposed to be levied. In other words, the notice mentioned […]
Tega Industries Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) Assessee has contended that disallowance under section 14A ought not to have been considered for computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act, we find merit in the assessee’s contention. Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT –vs.- Vireet Investment Pvt. Limited (165 […]
ACIT Vs Electrosteel Casting Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) It is clear from the rival contentions that determination price at which Power generated can be sold is subject to statutory control under the provisions of Section 61 & 62 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in its decision rendered in the case of […]
We are of the view that since the issue raised in the show-cause notice has already been examined by the ld. Assessing Officer in detail by conducting adequate enquiry calling for material evidence and other documents supporting the claim of deduction under section 54F of the Act, proper application of mind and taken a plausible view in light of the settled judicial precedence as referred by the ld. counsel for the assessee, there remains no scope for the ld. PCIT to invoke the jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act.
ACIT Vs Uniworth Textiles Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) We find that during the year the assessee has written off the sum of Rs. 84,56,692/- on account of sundry balance written off which was charged to the account of profit and loss account. We note that the substantial part of the amount represented the stock written off […]
Manash Nandi Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) We find that the AO has recorded the reasons u/s 148 of the Act in a very casual manner. We find that the AO has only reproduced in the reasons recorded the information received and hurriedly came to the conclusion that there exists escapement of income and evasion of […]
Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) Facts- The assessee has filed ROI on 9.10.2010 which was revised on 27.12.2010. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act accepting the returned income. Thereafter the case of the assessee was selected under scrutiny and statutory notices were duly issued and served upon the assessee. […]
ITAT held that non mentioning of relevant limb or non striking off of irrelevant limb in penalty notice is a substantive defect in imitation of proceedings itself and consequent penalty levied on the basis of such defective notice can not be sustained.
ITAT held that interest earned on late payment from sundry debtors and VAT remission shown as miscellaneous income are eligible profit for deduction under section 80IE
Merely that there were huge turnover i.e. deposits and withdrawal in the bank account of the assessee without correlating the same with the accounts and with the nature of the business of the assessee, in our view, that was not enough to form a belief of escapement of income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration.
