Where there was no dividend income earned during the relevant assessment year, there was no case for disallowing the expenditure relatable to dividend income.
Where assessee duly deducted tax at source under section 194C at the end of the year and remitted the same to Government account, the penalty imposed under section 271C for assessee’s failure to deduct tax at source and remittance to Government account, would not be sustainable.
AO was justified in making addition under section 68 of credit balance showing in assessees books of accounts against the Nil balance shown by the creditors in their books of accounts as on verification of the books of accounts of the creditor it was found that there was no balance outstanding against assessee and the same indicated that the credit balance shown in the books of the assessee was bogus.
ssessment made by AO in the name of the legal heir without issuing notice u/ 148 was not valid as the notice under section 148 was required to be issued to a correct person and not to a dead person and the same was not a merely a procedural requirement but was a condition precedent to the impugned notice being valid in law.
Penalty under 271FA was unjustified as there was no requirement to file the AIR in absence of reportable transaction during the financial year and also, department did not make out a case that the assessee had the recorded re portable transactions in the relevant financial year.
Where AO of searched person had not recorded the reasons and order sheet of AO of assessee though reasons were typed but remained unsigned, notice issued u/s 153C and the assessment order passed by AO was not valid as AO did not comply with the statutory requirement for issue of notice u/s 153C.
ACIT Vs Thatavarthi Ramesh Babu Kanuru (ITAT Visakhapatnam) It is no doubt true that the initial burden is upon the assessee to prove the correct value of the stock held by the assessee and he has to prove that the value reflected in the books of accounts is correct but the fact remains that the […]
Benefit u/s 54 can be availed even if plot was purchased prior to sale of property provided construction of the house property is completed within the time frame provided in Section 54.
Since the bank account in which assessee made huge cash deposits found during the course of search was not declared by assessee and assessee had not filed return for the year under consideration, therefore, the same constituted seized material so as to invoke section 153C in assessee’s case.
Recently, in the Kanaka Mahalakshmi Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT & vice-versa [ITA Nos. 299 & 300/VIZ/2017 and ITA Nos. 326 & 327/VIZ/2017, (A.Y.: 2012-13 & 2013-14), decided on 5.9.2018], there were cross appeals by the assessee and the Revenue for the AYs 2012-13 & 2013 & 14. In ITA No. 299/VIZ/2007, one of the ground related to the addition of Rs. 26,10,443/- on account of interest on reverse fund.
