Follow Us:

ITAT Mumbai

Disallowance U/s. 14A untenable in absence of Non-recording of satisfaction

November 23, 2017 1710 Views 0 comment Print

Phraseology of section 14A of the Act itself specifies that the satisfaction contemplated is required to be arrived at having regard to the accounts, an approach which is conspicuous by its absence in the present case.

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) for mere change of head of income is not justified

November 23, 2017 4314 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT Vs Krishna C. Tandon (HUF) (ITAT Mumbai) In this case penalty proceedings were initiated during quantum assessment for furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The assessee contested the same on the premises that full particulars were furnished in the return of income and there was no concealment of income and mere change of head of income […]

Amenity charges forming part of same transaction is assessable as House Property Income

November 22, 2017 2439 Views 0 comment Print

A bare perusal of nature of services, prima facie, reveals that the said services were of general in nature which is usually provided by the landlord to the tenant. Therefore, amenity charges, in our opinion, being part and parcel of same transaction, were asses sable as Income from House Property.

No Penalty for Bonafide Mistake in original Return which was revised later

November 21, 2017 2286 Views 0 comment Print

Assessing Officer that the actual investment made in the new residential house is Rs. 20 lakh, but, he has also filed a revised computation of income on 20th November 2012, offering taxable long term capital gain at a higher figure of Rs. 24,98,488. It is also a fact on record that the Assessing Officer has accepted the income shown in the revised computation of income. Therefore, considering the peculiar facts of the present case, we are of the view that the explanation of the assessee to the effect that investment shown in new house at Rs. 25 lakh was due to a bonafide mistake is acceptable.

Bogus purchases: Assessee Failed to prove existence of parties, ITAT estimated net profit at 12.5%

November 18, 2017 7065 Views 0 comment Print

Dy. CIT Vs. Fagioli India (P) Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) In this case assessing officers main allegation is that  two parties from whom appellant made purchases are involved in providing accommodation entries as per the list published by Maharashtra Sales Tax Department. On the other hand, assessee has furnished certain evidences in the form of purchase […]

Expenditure on improvement of existing business is revenue expense

November 14, 2017 2361 Views 0 comment Print

Spectrum Coal & Power Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai);  We noted that coal beneficiation has been defined as cost effective and significant step towards improving power plant efficiency and reducing the GHG emissions from the coal fired power plants in India would be to increase the availability of clean beneficiated coals using appropriate beneficiation technologies. […]

AO cannot treat allotment letter as fake in absence of any evidence

November 12, 2017 1707 Views 0 comment Print

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Mumbai) has held that, Income from Capital Asset is Capital Gain and not business Income even if Assessee was regularly booking Flats and Selling the same. Any kind of Income from Capital Assets held by the Assessee whether or not connected with his business of profession earned must be treated as capital gain.

Govt subsidy not related to any specific assets cannot be reduced from cost of asset

November 12, 2017 2157 Views 0 comment Print

Receipt of grant from US Aid through ICICI to create an institutional environment for technological innovations could not be regarded as meeting of cost of specific asset by Central Government or State Government or any authority established by any law in India or any other person, so as to cause Explanation 10 to section 43(1) get attracted to assessee’s case.

Compensation received for providing amenities is taxable as income from house property

November 12, 2017 7131 Views 0 comment Print

Receipts towards amenities are to be considered as part of rental income. However, the expenses incurred towards security service and pantry services are not connected to the rental income and hence, they should be deducted from the receipts from amenities.

Penalty for not getting accounts audited not leviable for bona fide reliance on ICAI ‘Note on Tax Audit U/s.44AB’

November 10, 2017 4794 Views 0 comment Print

In reply to the show-cause notice for initiation of penalty, the assessee has replied that he is a Sr. Citizen; his accounts are looked after by Accountant. The accountant of the assessee is not qualified person. The assessee was under bona fide belief that accounts are not required to be issued under section 44AB of the Act.

Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031