ITAT Rajkot dismisses Liliya Lathi Sahkari Sangh’s appeal as infructuous after CCIT condones late filing delay, directing AO to pass a consequential order.
ITAT Rajkot held that addition towards unexplained cash deposit under section 69A of the Income Tax Act not sustained since assessee has adequate evidence supporting its claim of cash deposits. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Rajkot remanded the matter as lower authority has not exercised their power to enquiry in section 131 and 133(6) of the Act to verify the genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the party in case of addition towards unsecured loan u/s. 68.
ITAT Rajkot held that addition on account of unexplained investment in purchase of immovable property u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act is liable to be deleted since assessee sufficiently proved that all the payments are made from wife’s NRI account.
ITAT Rajkot allows a 107-day delay in filing an appeal due to the assessee’s health issues and Covid-19, remanding the case to the AO for fresh adjudication.
In case of shares issued under amalgamation, there are no two parties to a transfer of a property. There are tripartite arrangements between amalgamated company, amalgamating company and shareholder of the amalgamating company.
ITAT Rajkot reviews the PCIT’s revision under Section 263 regarding income classification in Jayshree Sarees case.
ITAT Rajkot allowed appeals by Saurashtra Cement on guest house maintenance costs for AY 2014-15 and 2015-16, overturning prior disallowances.
Atlantic Shipping Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Rajkot) In a recent ruling by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Rajkot, the case of Atlantic Shipping Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer has brought to light critical issues regarding tax assessments for shipping companies operating in international waters and the applicability of the India-Singapore Double […]
The Tribunal reiterated that the PCIT cannot expand the scope of assessment beyond the reasons recorded by the AO during the reassessment process. Thus, any claims regarding non-verification of the other issues raised by the PCIT could not justify overturning the AO’s assessment.
