Shri Suresh Shivlal Bhasin Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) As regards imposition of penalty on the addition made on account of notional house property income, it goes without saying that in reality the assessee has not earned any income from house property. The Assessing Officer himself has observed that the addition made on account of income […]
This decision highlights the fact that the taxpayers need to meticulously analyze the functions, assets and risks of activities undertaken. Pursuant to that, the taxpayers need to determine whether the activity can be clubbed or should be benchmarked separately.
Assessee-American School of Bombay Education Trust was eligible for income tax exemption u/s. 10(22) as assessee had reasonable cause and justified the expenses claimed in the Income and Expenditure statement filed along with the return of income.
It was held after the accrual of consideration, the capital gain was liable to be assessed in the hands of assessee and income from short term capital gain/long term capital gain was only liable to tax when it accrued to assessee
Reassessment order passed by AO without issuing notice under section 143(2) was invalid as it is mandatory obligation of AO to serve notice by assigning reasons therein with regard to his belief of escaped tax liability before making reassessment of any escaped income.
Payment of municipal taxes are directly related to letting out of the property, therefore, the same could not be allowed as a deduction under Sec. 57(iii) for the purpose of earning of amenities charges by the assessee.
Akshaye Khanna Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee had been using speed-boat for travelling from Mumbai to Alibaug for his professional activities like acting, practice, health, maintenance, story telling etc. and hence, business asset has been utilized by assessee for commutation for professional work and therefore, the expenditure against the same was allowable to the assessee […]
First we shall deal with the appeals of Late Harshad S. Mehta through Legal Heir Smt. Jyoti H.S. Mehta for AY 1992-93 in ITA No.5702/Mum/2017 of assessee appeal and ITA No.6028/Mum/2017 of Revenue appeal.
Where assessee had tenancy right in property, which was converted into ownership before sale of shop, then period of holding would be determined from the date the assessee acquired ownership of the asset because on purchase of the property the tenancy right was converted into ownership and assessee had sold shop not tenancy right.
Payment of high remuneration to Directors cannot be disallowed by treating the same as a tool to shift profits to evade tax when the Directors have already offered the income for tax through their personal returns.
