AKS Power Equipments (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) Where assessee remitted employees contribution towards PF and ESI before filing of return under section 139(1) and that the amendment/Explanation brought in Section 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961 by Finance Act, 2021 with effect from 1-4-2021 on the instant issue being prospective in nature, the […]
Shri Ashutosh Jha (HUF) Vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata) The claim of the assessee has been that the assessee had purchased the property at a lower rate as per the value mentioned in the agreement to purchase dated 19-07-2012. However, the Ld. AO has adopted the stamp duty value as on date of sale i.e. 28-05-2013. […]
DCIT Vs Heilgers Development & Construction Company Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Kolkata) The loan amounts in question treated as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) by the AO were taken by the assessee-company from the three concerns on interest and since the said lending companies were compensated by interest paid by the assessee-company on the loans, the assessee-company […]
JMS Mining Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Kolkata) Current appeal has been filed against the order dated March 30, 2021 (Impugned order) passed by Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Respondent) under Section 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act). It is challenged on the ground of the invocation of jurisdiction by the Respondent without […]
If the assessee by mistake has wrongly registered itself under a wrong category that does not mean that the said mistake is not curable or that the assessee is to be punished for its bona fide mistake
DCIT Vs Saroj Kumar Poddar (ITAT Kolkata) Kolkata bench first of its kind of Interim order on the subject of endless adjournments by revenue on pretext of covid 19 and resultant pains to tax payer languishing for justice held remarkably as follows:- The Revenue is also raising strong objections, without any valid ground, for the […]
Sri Pradip Kumar Basu Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) It is observed that the long-term capital gain of Rs.6,14,674/- had arisen to the assessee as a result of residential property sold on 12.06.2013 and in order to claim exemption on account of long-term capital gain under section 54EC of the Act, the assessee was required to […]
AO had to confront assessee with the material collected behind the back of assessee, if he chosen to use the material against assessee and that he should provide assessee an opportunity of cross-examination. Not having done so made the evidence in question bad in law.
Hamilton & Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) We note that the payments in question was made to Mrs. Rekha Jalan and Mr. S.K. Jalan, who were directors of the assessee company. These payments were made pursuant to agreements for payment of bonus and commission copies of which were furnished to the Revenue. The payments […]
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 duly […]
