ITAT Rajkot

Difference between purchase price of land vis-a-vis Jantri Value could not be treated as assessee’s income

Jamanbhai D. Kalaria Vs DCIT (ITAT Rajkot)

AO was not justified in treating assessee's transaction of purchase of agricultural land from his wife as colorable device to avoid the legitimate payment of tax on mere difference between purchase price declared by assessee vis-a-vis Jantri Value as assessee had discharged his primary onus by furnishing the necessary details to justify t...

Read More

Contractors Performing Work in Nature of Developer-cum-Contractor Eligible to Claim Deduction u/s 80-IA

Patel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Rajkot)

Patel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Rajkot) The issue under consideration is whether contractors performing the work in the nature of a developer-cum-contractor are eligible to claim deduction u/s 80-IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? ITAT states that even after the amendment by the Finance Act, 2007 and the Finance Act, 2009, th...

Read More

Section 132(4) statement & notings found during search sufficient to invoke section 153A jurisdiction

Lalji Khimjibhai Patel Vs ACIT (ITAT Rajkot)

The issue under consideration is whether the assessee is correct in stating that cognizance taken under section 153A of the Act is illegal at the end of the A.O.?...

Read More

Provisions of section 153C on search date will be applied to proceedings

DCIT Vs Late Shri Pravinsinh N Zala (ITAT Rajkot)

DCIT Vs Late Shri Pravinsinh N Zala (ITAT Rajkot) Whether the amendment brought under the provisions of section 153C of the Act, where the word ‘belong’ was replaced with the word ‘pertain’ is applicable for the year under consideration. It was only on 1st June, 2015 when the amended provisions came into force that the […]...

Read More

Addition on estimate basis – Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed

Samatbhai Malabhai Parmar Vs ITO (ITAT Rajkot)

It is a settled principle of law that where addition to assessee’s income is made on estimate basis penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed....

Read More

Section 194C TDS not applicable on terminal handling charges

DCIT Vs Keshodwala Foods (ITAT Rajkot)

As per the circular no. 723 dated 19.09.1995 states that where the provisions of Section 172 are to apply, the provisions of Section 194C and 195 relating to tax deduction at source are not applicable....

Read More

TDS U/s. 194J deductible on investigation charges paid by Bank on assessee’s behalf

Addl. CIT Vs Hiravati Marine Products Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Rajkot)

Merely the payment of investigation charges to the chartered accountant firm was made by the bank on behalf of the assessee did not mean that the transaction was covered under the provisions of section 194A read with section 2(28A). As such the assessee was liable to deduct the TDS under section 194J and thus, assessee was not eligible fo...

Read More

Commission to Sahayak for collecting milk liable for TDS u/s 194C

DCIT Vs M/s. Maahi Milk Producer Co. Ltd. (ITAT Rajkot)

Commission payments made by assessee to Sahayak was on percentage basis depending on various parameters like number of farmers pouring milk, fat and SNF factor in milk, quantity of milk collected etc. which ensured payment was commensurate with work performed and thus, the nature of work carried out by the Sahayak were covered by provisio...

Read More

Usance interest for delayed payment to holding company liable to TDS

ACIT Vs M/s. Overseas Trading and Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Rajkot)

Usance interest paid for the delayed payment to its holding company was not any part of purchase price of goods and was interest within the definition of term ‘interest’ under section 2(28A), therefore, assessee was liable to withhold tax under section 195 from said payment....

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) justified on income disclosed during survey

Kashish Enterprise Vs ITO (ITAT Rajkot)

Assessee did not disclose income voluntarily but it was disclosed in pursuance to survey conducted under section 133A. Had there not been survey, the assessee would not have offered such undisclosed income, penalty under section 271(1)(c) was correctly levied by AO....

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,116)
Company Law (6,801)
Custom Duty (8,167)
DGFT (4,428)
Excise Duty (4,420)
Fema / RBI (4,501)
Finance (4,728)
Income Tax (35,512)
SEBI (3,795)
Service Tax (3,647)

Search Posts by Date

January 2021