Crawley & Roy Founders Engineers Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) In respect of addition made for delay in depositing of employees’ contribution to ESI, from the perusal of Form 3CD, we note that there is a typographical mistake in writing the year of deposit which has been mentioned as 2018 instead of 2017 as […]
Kkalpana Plastick Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) After hearing the rival contentions of the ld. representatives of the parties and going through the record, we are of the view that in this case, the assessee seems to be a victim of official apathy. The facts of the file reveal beyond doubt that the assessee filed […]
ITR form furnished before us is highly complicated and since the different column of the ITR was not interlinked, therefore, there was no auto-correction and hence there was mismatch of figures in the relevant/corresponding columns of ITR.
ITAT Kolkata held that liabilities which are incurred as trading liabilities with corresponding purchases cannot be subject matter of addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
Show cause notice issued u/s 274 of the Act does not specify the charge against the assessee as to whether it is for concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, such show cause notice are defective.
ITAT Kolkata held that addition of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as identity creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of the transactions duly proved.
ITAT Kolkata held that interest u/s 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act for late deposit of TDS amount is not leviable as TDS amount was duly deposited within the due date however, due to technical glitch the bank could not remit the amount immediately to the account of the department.
ITAT Kolkata held that rejection of deduction claimed under section 80JJAA of the Income Tax Act on the basis of minor technical defect is unsustainable. Moreover, audit report has given complete clarity of the deduction.
ACIT Vs BIP Developers Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Kolkata) In the present case, the commercial expediency of the interest expenditure in question was duly established by the assessee and on appreciation of the relevant facts of the case of the assessee as well as keeping in view the decision of the Hon ’ble Supreme Court in […]
Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) The assessee has claimed exemption under section 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act. Such exemption has been denied to the assessee by observing that it has booked the flat with the builder in earlier year but ultimately took the possession in subsequent years. Therefore, he failed […]
