Time City Real Estates (India) Limited Vs PCIT (ITAT Lucknow) In the present case, ITAT noted that the Assessing Officer had carried out sufficient enquiries and this is not even a case of lack of enquiry. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. has held that for assumption of jurisdiction […]
Shivansh Infraestate Pvt. Ltd Vs (ITAT Lucknow) ITAT find that it is undisputed fact that the assessee has been charged late fee u/s. 234E for various returns filed in the Form-26Q for late filing of the statements. These cases relate to Assessment Year 2014-15. The various Hon’ble High Courts including the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court […]
Salary of accountant cannot be treated as professional service for managing books of two firms to invoke TDS under section 194J
Ajay Verma Vs ITO (ITAT Lucknow) Asessing Officer made the additions on account of 50% share of profit and partner’s salary as the Assessing Officer has held that no ITR/balance sheet/P&L account of Partnership Firm was filed to substantiate the claim. Before CIT(A) assessee filed detailed ITR of the firm and also filed the copy […]
No Addition of Cash Deposit During Demonetisation Period under section 69A If Cash Deposit Is Part of Receipts Shown on Presumptive Basis and When the Part of Cash Deposit in Pre Demonetisation-Period Was Accepted.
ITAT held that Addition under section 68 of Income Tax cannot be made for purchases as purchases is an expense which is debited in books and not a loan or deposit which is credited in books
Explore the case of Vakeel Ahmad against ITO, focusing on bank deposits, withdrawals, and the taxation of peak credit. Detailed analysis of the order by ITAT Lucknow for Assessment Year 2010-11.
Held that exemption u/s 11 will not be available to an assessee if the total income of the assessee includes any income which is hit by the proviso to provisions of section 2(15) of the Act.
Gaurav Agarwal Vs DCIT (ITAT Lucknow) From the examination of documents found during search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act the Assessing Officer observed that assessee had received cash gifts of Rs.5,38,000/- in the name of his minor son. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to explain the cash gift received of […]
Ramesh Verma Vs ACIT (ITAT Lucknow) ITAT held that Reading clause (e) of the first proviso to section 43(5), and sections 70(1) and 73(1) of the I.T. Act together, it emerges that in the assessee’s case, since a derivatives commodity trading transaction is not a speculative transaction, loss arising therefrom can very well be set […]
