Ignorance of tax obligations on income earned from a partnership doesn’t excuse late filing of Income Tax Returns. ITAT Mumbai upholds Section 271F penalty in a recent case involving an advocate and his late ITR filing.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as the assessee being non-resident, income has been invested in India and not arisen in India.
ITAT Mumbai held that the employer has to remit both the contributions (employee’s contribution and employer’s contribution) to the Provident Fund within 15 days from the close of the month for which the employees earned their salary i.e., Salary payable.
ITAT Mumbai held that composite rental income received by letting out school building with infrastructure and amenities is taxable under the head ‘Income from House Property’ and not under ‘Income from income from other sources’ in view of section 56(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
Explore the Ahmednagar Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT case where the ITAT Mumbai rejected the claim of LTCG under section 10(38) due to the non-submission of documents, subsequently quashing the order.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 115BBE of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as present case doesn’t involve invocation of any of the sections i.e. section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C & 69D of the Income Tax Act.
A deep dive into ITAT Mumbai’s ruling in I.G. International Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, underscoring the importance of unambiguous notices under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash credit unsustainable as cash proceeds already reflected in Profit & Loss account, hence addition u/s 68 will amount to double taxation.
ITAT Mumbai held that deduction of unamortized brokerage expenses claimed through revised return of income is duly allowable.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance of interest expenditure paid u/s. 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act on late payment of TDS is penal in nature and not compensatory.
