Penalty under section 271E for violation of provision of section 269T could not be levied as assessee-company repaid loans advances otherwise than by crossed cheque, however, it substantiated with relevant documents that all the payments made by it were genuine and all the creditors accounted the loans as well as the repayments in their books of account and moreover, it was a mere technical violation.
Jupudi Venkateswara Rao Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) Ld.CIT(A) has given a clear finding that the assessee failed to produce the purchases book, stock register etc to verify the purchases or the unaccounted sales, the assessee has taken a different stand before the ITAT and argued that the difference was not related to purchase and sales […]
The issue under consideration is whether the re-opening of assessment u/s 147 is justified if the details on the basis of which case is re-opened was already available at the time of original assessment?
Gifts are normally made by relatives out of natural love and affection and do not necessarily require any particular occasion. Assessee had discharged his burden by furnishing necessary details before AO. In the absence of anything to show that the transactions were by way of money laundering,
Since assessee had deducted the TDS, but not remitted to Government account and for that he had not given any satisfactory explanation either before AO or before CIT(A), therefore, penalty under section 271C was justified.
Once the assessee had entered into agreement of sale coupled with power of attorney and handed over the possession of the property to the vendee, the transfer is complete as provided u/s 47 of the Act.
Section 5(2)(a) provides that only such income of non-resident would be subjected to tax in India that is either received or is deemed to be received in India, therefore, salary accrued to a non-resident seafarer for services rendered outside India on a foreign ship could not be included in total income merely because salary has been credited in the NRE/NRO account maintained with an Indian Bank by the seafarer.
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.
