The issue under consideration is whether the Penalty u/s 271F will be levied for non filing of Income Tax Return even in case of reasonable cause?
Deoyani Movies Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) No Penalty can be Levied on Cash Deposits if Assessee Explained its Source from Earlier Withdrawal and Recorded in Books of Accounts Simply because cash deposited in the bank is a little more than the cash sales, it cannot call for any addition, what to talk of […]
Bhagwan Keshu Sakhare Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) The issue under consideration is whether CIT is correct in denial of exemption u/s 54B of the Act? In the present case, the case of assessee is selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for the reason of “Deduction claimed under the head capital gains”. After claiming deduction for […]
The issue under consideration is whether the payment made by the company to its employees under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) is allowed as deduction?
Whether the ex-parte order of the CIT(Exemptions) denying 80G exemption is justified in law? ITAT dismissed ex-parte order of CIT(E) on the basis of principles of natural justice
Issues have been examined by the A.O and just because the opinion as arrived by the A.O is at a variation of the opinion of the learned Pr. CIT, would not grant the learned Pr. CIT the powers of revision u/s 263 of the Act.
Existence of reasons for escapement of income are sine qua non to embark upon the assessment or reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. Change or no change of opinion, as argued by the ld. DR, are the factors to be considered after fulfilling the jurisdictional condition of there being an escapement of income, in the absence of which no assessment or reassessment can be made u/s 147.
The appeal preferred by the Revenue. The issue under consideration is with regard to the bogus purchases conducted by the assessee and as per revenue CIT(Appeals) has erred in granting relief to the assessee without dealing specifically with the facts of the case and even not calling for any remand report from the Assessing Officer.
The issue raised by the assessee challenging the action of AO in holding the income from providing IT support services as taxable for fees for technical services.
The issue under consideration is that confirming the addition made u/s 68 by A.O. in respect of the loan taken from father of the appellant on mere suspicion.
