Gowtham Residential Junior College Vs ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam) The Ld.DR submitted that the assessee has declared income by way of rent received to the tune of Rs.2,06,66,410/- and treated the same as business income for the current year. The assessee has claimed expenses to the tune of Rs.88,51,069/- involving bank charges, repairs and maintenance, interest […]
Progressive Poultry Farm Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) As per provision of 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, if any amounts are used for non-business purposes by the assessee, the same are to be disallowed. Since in this case, the partners have made drawings from the assessee firm and used for non business purposes, the […]
Superintendent of Jails Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) It is noted that the TDS quarterly returns were filed belatedly after 1/6/2015 ie., the date of insertion of section 200A by Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f 1/6/2015. Therefore, on merits, we have no hesitation to come to a conclusion that the late fees levied by the Ld.AO is […]
We note that the term Cooperative Bank is specifically excluded in the first proviso to sub clause (a) of section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. Accordingly, the Ld. AO has rightly computed the deduction eligible U/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act. We therefore uphold the order of the Ld. AO on this ground.
Roman Catholic Diocese of Eluru Vs ACIT (Exemptions) (ITAT Visakhapatnam) Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Registered Society under the Societies Registration Act and is also registered u/s. 12A of the IT Act, 1961. The assessee is carrying out medical and educational activities and conducting pastoral activities in the name […]
ITO Vs Undavalli Constructions (ITAT Visakhapatnam) In the instant case there is no dispute that the land in question was purchased as capital asset and remained as capital asset till the partition. No business activity was carried on by the co-owners and the assessee has received the land on partition. The share of land received […]
Mattapalli Ram Kumar Vs ACIT (ITAT Vishakhapatanam) It is undisputed fact that the assessee had received compensation of Rs.1,33,88,000/- under compulsory acquisition of land under RFCTLARR Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has heavily relied on the Circular 36/2015 dated 25.10.2016 issued by the CBDT, wherein, it was mentioned that income tax shall not […]
S.V. Engineering Constructions India (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam) It is settled issue that no debatable issues are permitted to be made adjustments u/s 143(1) of the Act. In the instant case, what was added in the intimation u/s 143(1) was the employees contribution to PF and ESI. Hon’ble Madras High Court in the […]
Chodavaram Vs Asst. Director of Income Tax (ITAT Visakhapatnam) We are of the considered view that as in the instant case, the employees contribution qua ESI & PF for the Asst. Year: 2019-20 has been deposited before the due date of furnishing the return of income u/sec. 139(1) of the Act and therefore cannot be […]
Since no fresh information was collected by AO or no information had come to the notice of AO in normal course, other than the information collected during the course of search from searched person therefore, as provided under sections 153A and 153C, search assessments was required to be made under section 153A or section 153C, but not under section 147.
