Ideal Appliances Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post-search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found
During the financial year 2001-02 the assessee had installed wind energy project at a cost of Rs.1189.87 lakhs. The assessee accordingly applied for the said capital subsidy which was granted to the assessee during the relevant financial year 2007-08 at Rs.20 lakhs.
ITAT Mumbai held in the case ITO vs. Smt. Elsa Silva that as per the agreement , ‘Athithi Builders’ has acquired the development rights of the said property after paying separately and directly by cheque Rs.2.73 crores to the assessee, Rs.1.23 Crores to Shri D.P.Koli and Rs.0.50 crores to Shri Alex Silva.
ITAT Mumbai held in the case Syncom Formulations (I) Ltd. vs. DCIT that receiving of gifts by doctors is prohibited by MCI guidelines but giving of the same by manufacturer is not prohibited under any law for the time being in force.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of M/s. Ideal Appliances Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT that it is settled legal position that no addition can be made to the income already assessed since no incriminating material was unearthed during the search.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of M/s. Radiant Premises Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT that the phrase rent received and receivable u/s 23, contemplates the amount received for the enjoyment of the property and certain rights in the said property by the tenant.
ITAT Mumbai held in the case of In the case of Lands End Co-operative Housing Society Limited vs ITO, that receipt of transfer fees, Non-occupancy charges and car parking charges are covered by the principle of mutuality.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of ACIT vs. Reliance Industrial Infrastructure Ltd. that on perusal of the reasons recorded by AO for initiating the re-assessment proceedings, it is clear that the said details were available while completing the assessment u/s 143(3). Further, the AO has reopened the assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of Shri Vimal Kumar Rathi vs. DCIT that it is settled legal position that in the absence of any incriminating material found during search, additions made on the assessed income are unsustainable in law.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of M/s. UniDeritend Limited vs. ACIT that the subsidy being provided to the assessee to encourage the setting up of wind mill to promote generation of energy through non conventional sources, thus, is to be treated as capital receipt.
