Prodyut Kumar Ghos Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) ITAT noted that assessee in his R.O.I (return of income) erroneously reflected the sale consideration that he received to the tune of Rs.26,96,250/- as agricultural income. On being confronted by the AO and when asked by the AO to produce evidence of agricultural income, the assessee realized the […]
Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) We note that the assessee has made a claim of deduction regarding donation made to the tune of Rs. 27,27,000/- but the AO disallowed the claim. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has given partial relief by allowing 50% of expenditure claimed as donation. We note that on similar […]
Massive Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) In this case Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order without hearing the assessee and not on merits there is a violation of Natural Justice. Therefore, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to the file of the […]
Sheo Shakti Coke Industries Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) From the perusal of above finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that he has lucidly dealt with all the facts pertaining to discrepancies noticed in the financials of the assessee-firm and has also referred to various charts depicting the profitability of the assessee-firm in preceding years […]
An additional surcharge, to be called the Education Cess to finance the Government’s commitment to universalise quality basic education, is proposed to be levied at the rate of two per cent on the amount of tax deducted or advance tax paid, inclusive of surcharge.
AO to consider only the opening and closing value of those investments which actually yielded dividend income to the assessee during the relevant year for the purposes of computing the disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(iii).
Lumino Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) Retention money kept with the Electricity Board which would be released latter only once the assessee fulfills all the obligations under the contract then only the assessee would acquire the right to receive such retention money so this is contingent in nature, so the amount in question cannot […]
Lovely International Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) We find from the discussion at para 5 (supra) of this order and the finding of Ld PCIT given below para 5 corroborates that the AO in fact had issued notice u/s 142(1) and called for all the details of the share subscribers/share premium and pursuant to […]
Smt. Tapasi Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) It is observed that all the four donors who had given the gifts in question to the assessee during the year under consideration were engaged in the business and in the returns of income filed regularly for the year under consideration, the business income earned by them was […]
Where AO made addition under section 68 in respect of a loan received by assessee, however, it was found that the said loan was not received during the assessment year under consideration; the addition made under section 68 on account of such loan was not called for during the said assessment year and hence, the said addition was liable to be deleted.
