In the Prompt Barter Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO case, ITAT Kolkata directs AO to remove the income tax addition due to non-consideration of evidences for identity and creditworthiness of investors.
ITAT Kolkata held that invocation of revisionary power u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act without pointing out the error committed by AO and without recording a finding regarding escapement of income is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Kolkata held that as per provisions of section 23(1)(c) the annual lettable value of the vacant property of unsold units/flats held as stock-in-trade by the assessee but remained vacant during the year is to be computed at Rs. NIL.
ITAT Kolkata held that as assessee has provided the explanation with documentary evidence and such documents have not been held as false either by AO during assessment proceedings or during penalty proceedings. Hence, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) not leviable.
ITAT Kolkata directs relief for Spandan Tradecom in a case of incorrect accounting and wrong grouping of investments, clarifying it’s not a bogus investment.
Explore the Sanjeev Khemka vs PCIT case, addressing limited scrutiny, jurisdiction, and errors under Section 263 – ITAT Kolkata decision.
ITAT Kolkata held that exercising revisionary proceedings u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act purely on facts which are verifiable from records of the assessee is not justifiable and hence liable to be quashed.
ITAT Kolkata held that rejection of claim of long-term capital loss u/s 50B of the Income Tax Act unjustified as Form 3CEA filed during the assessment proceedings along with an affidavit mentioning reason for non-furnishing of Form 3CEA with return of income.
ITAT Kolkata held that exemption under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act not eligible in respect of long Term Capital Gain from sale of equity shares of penny stock companies listed with Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE).
ITAT Kolkata held that there is no finding that interest bearing funds have been applied for purpose of making investment. Further, on account of sufficient availability of interest free funds, interest disallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) unjustified.
