Komal Gurumukh Sangtani Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Section 48- Capital gains – Cost of improvements- The assessee always pleaded that the purchase of various items as tabulated supra were made in order to make the house habitable and proper for living condition which is very normal and would be incurred by every citizen of the […]
DCIT Vs Macrotech Developer Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT concur with the view taken by the CIT(A) that as the assessee had own funds which were far more than the investments in OPCD, therefore, the presumption would be that the investments were made from own funds and no disallowance of any part of interest expenditure claimed […]
Suminter India Organics Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT held that When the overriding provisions of Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxations and Amendments of Certain Provisions) Act 2020 (TOLA) provide separate relaxations for the purpose of the legal obligations with respect to the filing of return vis-à-vis filing of other documents, to that extent, […]
Held that as per the agreement there was only permissible possession given to the developer and the same cannot be treated as transferred under section 2(47)(4).
Held that there was bonafide belief of the assessee that passing journal entries, even though in violation of mode prescribed u/s. 269SS and section 269T, is permissible. Entries done before judgement of Hon’ble Bombay HC in the case of Triumph International. Penalty deleted on the basis of reasonable cause.
Royal Accord Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) In a taxing statute one has to look merely at what is clearly said in the section. There is no room for any intendment. There is no concept of equity in tax law. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One has […]
CIT(A), NFAC has erred in not granting an opportunity to the appellant bank to present the case through the video conferencing as specified under the Faceless Appeals Scheme 2020
Estate of Late Harkishin Bhojraj Chanrai Vs DCIT CPC (ITAT Mumbai) Undisputed facts though the assessee has filed its return of income declaring an income of ₹ 1,288,261/– in the status of association of person of estate of a diseased individual. The tax liability is required to be computed as per the normal tax as […]
Held that the interest income in question is required to be taxed at 10% in terms of the provisions of Article 11(2) of the India-Japan DTAA
CIT(A) merely followed certain case laws without discussing nature of expenses claimed by assessee – Order not sustainable
