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.
Orbit Dealmark (P) Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) The Registry has informed that this appeal is time barred by 1535 days. On going through the condonation application along with the affidavit, and after hearing both the parties, we find that this delay is accountable for three reasons. Firstly, Sri Naresh Kumar Chhaparia, Director of M/s […]
Bishnupur Public Education Institute Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITAT Kolkata) The adjudicating authorities under the Income Tax Act are quasi-judicial authorities. They can grant approval with retrospective effect if such mechanism is provided in the Act. There is no such provision nor there is any power to condone the delay after considering the reasonable reasons. A […]
Ashim Krishna Bhatta Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT note that the assessee is an operator of trucks and lorries on hire. During the year, the assessee has incurred expenditure on replacements of old truck bodies which was treated as revenue expenditure however wrongly shown under the head depreciation by claiming 100% of the said expenditure […]
Explore ITAT Kolkata’s ruling in Anju Chamaria vs ITO regarding 271B penalty. Analysis of turnover, audit requirement, and key legal insights provided.
ITAT Kolkata ruling: CPC can’t make adjustments u/s 143(1)(a) without proper enquiry. Appeal allowed, adjustment on turnover without jurisdiction.
In the present case we find that the entire addition is on the basis of some investigation report, the relevant portions of which is also not cited in the show cause or the assessment order, there is nothing against the assessee and no inquiry whatsoever has been done by the AO or the Ld CIT (A).
ITAT Held that sales tax subsidy is capital receipt mistakenly offered by the assessee as income is mistake apparent on record. Accordingly, appropriate relief/ refund available to assessee.
