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 […]
The issue under consideration is whether the Lease payment in advance for the period varied from 15 to 99 years considered as Capital Expenditure or Revenue Expenditure?
Interest paid on late deposit of VAT, Service Tax, TDS etc, was not penal in nature and the same was allowable as business expenditure under section 37(1)
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 […]
Mumtaz Hotels Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) CIT(A) opined that the said clothes were not protective ones and they are not uniforms and not compulsory uniform under the statute. We find that the employees’ uniforms have traditionally been used as a functional necessity. It is noted from the record that the assessee assumed the financial […]
Sudip Roy Choudhury Vs JCIT (TDS) (ITAT Kolkata) in the present case, the assessee deducted the TDS and deposited the same. Even there was no failure to submit return in Form 26Q. There was only failure for its timely submission – which by all counts is a technical breach. Further the delay had happened due […]
DIC Fine Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) It was a case where on account of the disallowance made by the AO, the loss returned by the assessee stood converted into positive sum and made the appellant eligible to claim deduction u/s 10AA of the Act. We thus find that as per the position […]
Shri Basant Kumar Nahata Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) It is noted that a house property was inherited by the assessee in his native village situated at Rajasthan which was duly shown in his Balance Sheet. Since the assessee has residential house at Kolkata, the AO invoked sec. 22 and 23 of the Act, estimated the […]
When assessee received advances from customers and the same were subsequently adjusted against goods sold to them, then, the advances could not be treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68, therefore, addition under section 68 made by AO on account of unexplained cash advances was deleted.
As there was no whisper about escapement of income, i.e., loss created by misusing client’s code modification, in the reasons for reopening conveyed to the assessee, therefore, no addition in respect of this could be made without making any addition in respect of the item shown to have escaped assessment in the reasons recorded.
