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 […]
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.
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 […]
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 […]
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), […]
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 […]
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 […]
HUF is owner of the said agricultural land though it is registered in the name of the Coparcener, as the HUF is enjoying all the fruits of the said agricultural land. Thus, the HUF is entitled to claim exemption/deduction under section 54B of the Act.
Ashish Natvarlal Vashi Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) 1. Merely cash deposit in a saving bank account does not show that income has escaped assessment. The process of reasoning is absent, and these reasons were not recorded on standalone basis therefore reopening made by the Assessing Officer may be quashed. 2. The amount deposited in the […]
In the absence of any link between the assessee and the alleged admissions of the directors and brokers, human probability is being used as a vague and convenient medium for the department’s conjectures. No addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. The burden of proving a transaction to be bogus has to be strictly discharged by adducing legal evidences, which would directly prove the fact of bogusness or establish circumstance unerringly and reasonably raising an interference to that effect.
