Follow Us:

ITAT Surat

If no incriminating material found during Search- Section 68 additions not sustainable

April 7, 2022 1941 Views 0 comment Print

Since no incriminating material was found during the course of search, as regards the additions made u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act, therefore, no additions could be made.

Bogus Purchase: Disallowance may be restricted to the extent of profit embedded in such purchases

February 13, 2022 4974 Views 0 comment Print

ITO Vs Shree Deepak Banwarilal Agarwal (ITAT Surat) We find that during the assessment the AO made addition of 100% of purchases shown by the assessee from four parties which were managed by “PK Jain” and his group. The AO made addition on the basis of report of Investigation Wing about the search & seizure […]

No justification of making addition in absence of any evidence of unaccounted investment

February 10, 2022 3231 Views 0 comment Print

Raj Enterprise Vs DCIT (ITAT Surat) The Hon’ble Gujarat high Court in CIT Vs Golden Finance (supra) held that where Assessing Officer made addition on account of unexplained investment on basis of document impounded during survey and statement recorded by partner of assessee-firm, in view of fact that said documents did not suggest that noting […]

Interest Income cannot be excluded for computing eligible remuneration of Partners

December 30, 2021 1539 Views 0 comment Print

Mac Industries Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) No disallowance as AO did not get jurisdiction to go behind net profit shown by Profit and Loss Account except adjustments as per Explanation 3 Conclusion: Addition on account of interest incomes to be excluded in the computation of book profits was not justified by AO as per Explanation […]

No penalty unless there was conscious concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.

November 26, 2021 8559 Views 0 comment Print

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not leviable as  AO was not certain that for which limb he wanted to initiate penalty proceedings, that is, for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. AO initiated penalty proceedings on one footing and concluded on other footing, therefore, the basis of levy of penalty itself was not correct.

Transfer Pricing Officer: Quasi-capital are treated differently than normal loan transactions

November 21, 2021 5481 Views 0 comment Print

Bilakhia Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Surat) Facts- The Assessee Company being an investment company had received shares from its Promoters as a gift. The AO dismissed this claim stating that it was purchased by the assessee company at a discount from the said Promoters and that consideration was involved. Hence, AO disallowed the […]

No additions for cash deposit duly explained with cash flow statement 

November 10, 2021 3717 Views 0 comment Print

Smt. Renukaben Umedsinh Parmar Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) The assessing officer made addition by taking his view that assessee is a Government Employee and was maintaining bank account and that a person who is maintaining bank account will not keep such huge cash in hand which is abnormal. The ld.CIT(A) concurred with the finding of […]

If AO made addition on estimated GP basis than other item-wise disallowance should not be made

October 29, 2021 3825 Views 0 comment Print

Devyani Tex Chem Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Surat) From the above facts it is abundantly clear that books of accounts of the assessee were rejected by the assessing officer and on appeal, ld CIT(A) upheld the rejection of books of accounts and reduced the profit estimation. We also upheld the order of ld CIT(A), […]

Addition under section 69A unsustainable for cash deposited as facilitator

October 28, 2021 5403 Views 0 comment Print

Ashish Natvarlal Vashi Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) Conclusion- Cash deposited in bank was transferred to insurance company by way of insurance premium in the name of respective insurer – Assessee acted as facilitator and not the owner of the cash deposited in bank account – Addition not possible under section 69A. Facts- The assessee deposited […]

Amount shown in 26AS not taxable if assessee was not actual beneficiary of said amount

October 3, 2021 3855 Views 0 comment Print

Dr Swati Mahesh Vinchurkar Vs DCIT (ITAT Surat) No addition of amount shown in form 26 AS for taxation If assessee is not the actual beneficiary such amount In Dr Swati Mahesh Vinchurkar v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore [ IT APPEAL No. 43 (SRT) OF 2021 dated June 28, 2021], Dr Swati Mahesh Vinchurkar  […]

Search Post by Date
April 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930