ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment unsustainable as there is no satisfaction of the competent authority before issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that once it is established that the funds are used wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business interest paid on such borrowed funds is allowed u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.
If sales are not disputed, entire alleged bogus purchases cannot be disallowed and only the gross profit on the alleged purchases to be disallowed. No penalty under section 271(1)(c) is leviable on estimated additions.
Mere submission of amendment by post to Charity Commissioner cannot be considered to be due registration with Charity Commissioner. What is required to be shown by assessee is that amendment carried out to trust deed has been registered with Charity Commissioner and his approval has been obtained.
It is settled proposition of law that proceedings initiated and orders passed in the name of the dead person is not valid. However, it appears that the AO was not aware of the fact of death of the assessee and the copy of death certificate is furnished for the first time before us.
ITAT held that lease rental received by assessee on leasing of alloys cannot be treated as royalty in terms of India-USA DTAA & provisions of section 9(1)(vi)
Assessment order cannot be termed as erroneous and prejudicial to interests of revenue if AO has taken one of possible views of matter.
ITAT Mumbai deleted penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act as penalty order was issued without striking off the irrelevant limb/ inapplicable words.
JCIT (OSD) Vs Yashmaan Pathak (ITAT Mumabi) No scope of adhoc or estimated addition u/s. 41(1) & the entire conditions precedent for invoking section 41(1) has to be fulfilled. Assessee has filed his return of income and the AO during scrutiny issued show cause notice to the assessee to file details and confirmation of the […]
ITAT Mumbai held that plausible view of AO cannot be held as erroneous by ld. CIT(E) without conducting necessary enquiries or verification. Accordingly, initiated of revision jurisdiction u/s 263 on mere conjectures, suspicions and surmises, which is not permitted.
