Union Bank of India Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) We find that AO has withdrawn, the relief granted u/s. 14A in the assessment order by mentioning that subsequently order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. 402 ITR 640 has come. Accordingly, he has effectively made the disallowance us/.14A u/s 154 of the Act. We […]
Pramod Lele Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) 1. The expression ‘Technical Consultancy’ would only mean rendering of technical services by assessee. In our considered opinion, the expression ‘Management Consultancy’ could not be brought within the ambit of “technical consultancy”. 2. Hence, we hold that the provisions of Section 44AA(1) of the Act cannot be made applicable […]
ACIT Vs Solvay Pharma India Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) We observe that the CBDT Circular dated 1-8-2012 (supra) in its clarification has enlarged the scope and applicability of ‘Indian Medical Council Regulation 2002’ by making it applicable to the pharmaceutical companies or allied health care sector industries. Such an enlargement of scope of MCI regulation to […]
ACIT Vs Farah Khan (ITAT Mumbai) During the course of assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee owned 6 flats / units (A3501A, A3501B, A3501C, A3601A, A3601B & A3601C) on 35th & 36th floor of a Building namely Oberoi Sky Heights situated at Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai. All the units were stated to be […]
Shri Kamal H. Shah Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Undisputedly, the assessee has failed to prove genuineness of purchases and the authenticity of the dealers in both the impugned assessment years. The notices sent to the dealers under section 133(6) of the Act on the addresses furnished by the assessee by the Assessing Officer were received […]
M/s. Vaghasiya Exports Vs Pr. CIT (ITAT Mumbai) Ld. AO was clinched with the issue of suspicious purchases made by the assessee from various entities of tainted group. In fact, it is the only addition made in the assessment order. Specific queries were raised requiring the assessee to substantiate the purchases under suspicion. The assessee […]
Vodafone Idea Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) In this case Learned Departmental Representative could not disputed the proposition that hearing of the appeal after the last stay could not take place because of no fault of the assessee. Accordingly, we extend the stay for a period of six months from the date of this order […]
Jaswantlal J Shah Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) In ground No.1 of appeal, the assessee has impugned the validity of assessment order on the ground that the Assessing Officer has no jurisdiction to pass the assessment order. The short contention of the assessee is that before changing jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer under section 127 of […]
Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) From the stage of the assessment proceeding itself, it is the claim of the assessee that the term ‘tax’, as defined under section 2(43) of the Act would only include taxes chargeable under the Indian Income Tax Act. It is the further case of the assessee that […]
Any order of the subordinate authority which could have been considered as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue in allowing assessee’s claim of deduction under section 80IA, either due to lack of enquiry or otherwise, was the original assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C and not the re-assessment order. PCIT had proceeded to revise the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 to get over the hurdle of limitation which was impermissible.
