Common appeal is raised by the assessee against the order of CIT relating to assessment year 2001-02 & 2005-06, therein CIT by virtue of Sec 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961(ACT) ordered assessing officer to make fresh assessment for said asstt year
In the Case of ACIT VI, Kanpur vs. Z Square Shopping Mall Private Limited, ITAT held that the interest earned on FDR, Gains from investment of Mutual Fund is not inextricably linked or connected with the construction activities
ITAT Lucknow held In the case of Shri Jeevan Kumar Agarwal vs. ACIT that there is no specific provision in the Act requiring the assessment made under section 153A to be after issue of notice under section 143(2). In the case of Ashok Chaddha vs. CIT
ITAT Lucknow held In the case of M/s Treadstone International vs. ACIT that we find no merit in the contention of the assessee that every time new Officer should issue a notice u/s 143(2). Whenever jurisdiction is transferred from one Officer to other Officer the subsequent officer
ITAT Lucknow held In the case of M/s Clara Swain Hospital vs. ITO that no capital gain liability can be imposed on the assessee where he does not own the asset and more ever he has not received any payment for such transfer.
ITAT Lucknow held In the case of M/s Vijay Infrastructure Limited vs. ACIT that on the basis of general observations, without pointing out even a single specific defect in the vouchers or books of accounts, ad hoc disallowance made by Assessing Officer is not justifiable.
ITAT Lucknow held In the case of DCIT vs. M/s Scooters India Ltd. that as per the provisions of section 150(2), the provisions of sub section (1) of section 150 are not applicable if it is found that at the time when the order of CIT (A) was passed
In the matter of transfer pricing adjustment, no reasons have been given by the present TPO to reject the method of Cost Plus basis adopted by the assessee and accepted by the Department in earlier year(s).
The ITAT Lucknow in the case of Sharad Mishra vs. ITO held that the arrival of assessee in India at night cannot be treated as his stay for the complete day. Thus, the actual hours of the day stayed only could be counted as stay in India on that day.
ITAT Lucknow in the case of ACIT vs. M/s Northern Tannery held that The commission paid to the non- resident agent for procuring order and recovering payments on the behalf of assessee could not be treated
