Income Tax : The reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s MT Builders Pvt. Ltd., (...
Income Tax : The assessee company is engaged in real estate business. It paid cash advance for purchasing a plot and reflected it in balance sh...
Income Tax : AO made the disallowance by invoking the provisions of section 40A(2) of the Act, however nothing was brought on record on the bas...
Income Tax : The reopening has basically been done for two reasons – the first one being the alleged difference between Unsecured Loans from ...
Income Tax : In the present case also the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2010 in the name of the deceased assessee and claimed t...
Service Tax : Tribunal held that the service provided by appellant was not in relation to agriculture. Further appellant’s claim that service ...
Service Tax : In the entirety of the show cause notice there is not a single assertion proposing to levy and collect service tax on the basis o...
There is no right of appeal provided under the statute against the order passed u/s. 264 of the Act. In fact a party to litigation can move to an appropriate forum only when the statute provides for such a right. As can be noticed from section 253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (‘CIT’) u/s. 264 of the Act is not appealable before the Appellate Tribunal.
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Durga Kamal Rice Mills Vs. CIT (2004) 265 ITR 25 (Cal.) has held that quantum proceedings are different from penal proceedings. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs. P.K. Narayanan (1999) 238 ITR 905 (Ker.) has held that despite the addition being confirmed by Tribunal in quantum proceedings, the penalty can still be deleted by the Tribunal, if the facts justify.
No interest under the provisions of section 234A, 234B or 234C or penalty under the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 271 or section 271A or section 271B shall be levied or imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income determined in the block assessments
The assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate and distinct proceedings. The fact that certain additions were made in the assessment proceedings would not automatically justify for imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
The assessee company is engaged in real estate business. It paid cash advance for purchasing a plot and reflected it in balance sheet under loans and advances given. The AO made addition of 20 % of amount paid as advance, invoking the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
In the recent judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Madhukar Khosla vs. ACIT (supra), the Hon’ble Court has held that ‘if there is no reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment based on new tangible material, then the reopening of assessment amounts to impermissible review’.
The assessee company is not the shareholder in M/s Precision Stock & Credit Pvt. Ltd. and received the amount from the said company in the course of ordinary business activities. Therefore, in view of ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the aforesaid referred to case, the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act were not applicable.
The assessee submitted that he produced following evidences before the AO to prove the identity and creditworthiness of Shri Vinod Kumar :- (i) Copy of Share Application received from Mr. Vinod Kumar (ii) Copy of Shares Certificate of shares Allotted to him (iii) Copy of confirmation received from him
Here the assessee originally did not have the correct PANs of all the persons from whose payments, tax at source was required to be deducted. Despite that, the assessee did deduct tax at source and paid the amount to the exchequer well in time. The only fault of the assessee was in not filling PANs of some of the deductees which were not available at the time of filing e-returns. As soon as the AO issued notice for imposing penalty u/s 272B, the assessee obtained the relevant PANs and complied with the requirement by filing the revised statement.
Section 1115JB is non-obstante section and a complete code by itself, which provides that in case of a company, the income tax payable on the total income is computed under the Income tax Act in respect of any previous year is less than 7.5% (which percentage has been increased from time to time) of its book profit,
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
