ITAT Kolkata held that as reasons to believe, as recorded by AO, for reopening of the assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is not supplier to the assessee, it will be construed that no valid notice is served and hence the proceedings are liable to be set aside.
ITAT Kolkata held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not leviable as computation of income resulting into higher income is only a difference of opinion.
ITAT Kolkata held that education cess and Secondary and higher Secondary Education cess being part of the tax is not allowable as deduction.
Ld. Sr. DR had raised an objection stating that issues relating to the ground of appeal taken in the present case falls under the exception clause contained in the said CBDT circular and, therefore, has to be heard on merit. To this effect, a report was called from the Ld. AO to make a submission as to how the present appeal is covered under the exception clause contained in the CBDT circular.
If there is no tax-free income, then no section 14A disallowance is to be made based on assumption that in future, some tax-free income will result to assessee on investment.
Interest from staff welfare fund, interest income from staff loan, charges for closing flexi account and fine against non-payment of R/D amount due in time are eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i).
In the present case, the very addition in the declared income has been deleted by the Tribunal therefore, there is no foundation to compute the penalty upon the assessee. In view of the deletion of the additions in the quantum appeal, no penalty is imposable upon the assessee.
Binayak Hi-Tech Engineering Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) The Assessing Officer observed from the evidence furnished by the assessee that during the year, the assessee has incurred sales promotion expenses to the tune of Rs.10,51,242/-. The Assessing Officer noted that these payments were made towards payment of credit card bills of Ms. Priyanka Jhunjhunwala and […]
ITAT Kolkata held that addition based on such retracted statement of third person and that too without giving any opportunity of cross examination to the assessee deserves to be deleted.
ITAT Kolkata held that reassessing income post completion of assessment u/s 143(3) without any incriminating material found and seized during the course of search is unsustainable. Accordingly, addition thereof is liable to be deleted.
