DCIT Vs Rashmi Float Glass Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) We find that the only addition made is of share application received u/s 68 of the Act and addition of commission paid allegedly for the share application money and finally a disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. No incriminating material has been found during the course of […]
DCIT Vs Landis+ Gyr Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) Expenditure incurred for construction / acquisition of new facility which had to be abandoned midway will be allowable as a revenue expenditure as incurred wholly or exclusively for the purpose of assessee’s business. It is to be noted that in the instant case also, the expenditure incurred by […]
ACIT Vs Sreeleathers (ITAT Kolkata) Firstly the survey statement has been recorded by DDIT(Inv) in some third party case and not that of assessee. Secondly the deponent has been administered oath before his statement was recorded, which is not in accordance to Section 133A of the Act and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Khader Khan […]
Deloitte Haskins & Sells Vs Additional Director of Income Tax (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT, Kolkata has specifically propounded that if employees’ contribution received by an assessee and paid to ESI and PF accounts before the due date of filing of the return, then the assessee will be eligible to claim the deduction of such amounts. With […]
Sandeep Modi Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) It is noted that the assessee has taken a life insurance policy in AY 2012-13 of the SBI of sum assured to the tune of Rs.10,88,000/- (along with credit bonus of 3.25%) by paying single premium of Rs.10,00,000/-. And in this year (AY 2017-18), the assessee received the LIC […]
ITAT Kolkata allowed assessee’s deduction for LIC group gratuity scheme. Relying on precedent, control over funds is key for Section 36(1)(v) applicability.
In our opinion, the addition of such types which are made during the course of survey on oath cannot be made unless there is a supporting material. In our opinion, the addition on estimated basis cannot be justified for reasons, the AO has not rejected the books of account.
Arman Advisory Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has made a bald statement that the AO’s assessment order attracts Explanation 2(c) u/s. 263 of the Act. However, he failed to spell out in his impugned order how the action of AO while framing the assessment order is not in […]
Shri Bhaskar Roy Vs ITO (TDS) (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT held that demand raised by the Income Tax Authorities for levying late fee u/s. 234E of the Act for the period prior to 01.06.2015 cannot be sustained and we order accordingly. However, we hasten to add that Hon’ble Karnataka High Court while passing the order had […]
Luit Developers Private Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise it is trite law that figures of Form 26AS are not to be used for determining Service Tax liability unless there is proof to show that it was on account of any taxable service and relies on the order of the Tribunal in Kush […]
