The Mumbai bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) has ruled that date of possession is not material fact for deciding the period of holding to Compute Short Term or Long Term Capital Gain.
Mumbai bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), recently upheld the book-value based taxation of partner on capital contribution of immovable property in the case of a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) and proclaimed in its recently published order.
Centaur Mercantile P. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) It is undisputed that the assessee has booked bogus purchases thereby inflating work-in-progress. Hence, it is clear that the assessee was owner of undisclosed income during the year. It was because of the system of accounting followed by the assessee being percentage completion method, that there was […]
Scope of Section 254(2) to rectify mistake apparent from record is very limited and tribunal cannot review its own decisions within limited scope of Section 254(2) unless there is a mistake apparent from records neither it is shown that tribunal order is perverse not sustainable in the eyes of law.
Gains arising from purchase and sale of shares which were squared up within 30 days of purchase would be treated as business income and if transactions were squared up after 30 days of purchase of shares same would be treated as capital gains and in the case of business income STT paid would be allowed.
Estate of Late Vrajlal Mehta Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) We noticed that explanation of the assessee that two bank accounts belonged to Shri Rajesh Mehta have been accepted by the search officials as well as Assessing Officer. We notice that the balance available in those bank accounts have been assessed by the learned CIT(A) only, […]
M/s. Varsha Corporation Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT (ITAT Mumbai) In the case under consideration, in the computation of income,the assessee had not claimed any exempt income. The expenditure claimed by it in the profit and loss account have not been shown to have been incurred for earning any exempt income during the year under consideration. […]
Shri Ramesh Salecha HUF Vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Revenue could not produce before us any evidence to show that notice under sections 143(2) has been issued or served to the assessee the re-assessment made under sections 143(3) read with section 147 is void ab-initio in view of the above decisions of the Honorable Allahabad High Court in […]
M/s. Essel Pro pack Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Assesses has incurred expenses on behalf of certain foreign subsidiaries and Indian subsidiary and shown them under the head Advances Recoverable. The assessee has not made any non business advance to the these companies, but these amount represents various debits in the nature of sale of […]
The objection of the revenue that the assessee intentionally waited for mechanical lapse of 36 months and deliberately put the date on agreement as 18-11-2009 to avoid the payment of tax is not tenable.
