CA Ghanshyam Vaswani - Page 2

Addition cannot be made merely on the facts that assesse had filed a petition to claim the same

CIT Vs Sivalik Cellulose Ltd (Delhi High Court)

The assessee submitted that with respect to the addition of ₹24.3 crores, both the CIT(Appeals) and the ITAT had noticed that the matter with respect to this liability was sub-judice and pending adjudication in the Company Court which since by its interim judgment dated 25.4.2013...

Commercial / Industrial properties cannot be assessed to Wealth tax

PASL Windtech Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

For the purpose of levy, assets are classified as two categories one as productive and other as non productive. Under the provisions of amended Act, tax is levied only on non productive assets such as residential house, urban land, jewellery, bullion, motor car etc. In the case in hand, industrial plots are being utilized as productive as...

271(1)(c) : Penalty can be imposed on undisclosed bank accounts based on peak credits theory

Naranbhai S.Patel. Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

We find that it is not in dispute that the undisclosed bank account which was detected by the department contains transfer entries to other 5 undisclosed bank accounts maintained by the assessee. In view of this fact the Tribunal concluded that the subsequent disclosure of the assessee of existence of the said 5 bank accounts cannot be he...

14A : No disallowance of expenditure can be made on estimate basis against exempt income

Kulgam Holdings P. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

The Revenue has not brought any positive material on record to show that the assessee actually incurred any expenses in relation to earning of exempt income. In our considered view, before making disallowance under section 14A, it was imperative on the part of the Revenue...

Expense cannot be held unproved, un-genuine and bogus sham for merely because it remain unpaid on B/s Date

M/s.Ambica Foundary Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Simply because outstanding liability at the end of the year is comparatively higher, considering the amount of expenditure incurred during the year, does not empower the AO to disallow the actual outstanding liability unless it is found that the liability shown was not genuine. ...

In case of rejection of books of account profit ratio applied for earlier year should be considered

Shri Raghvendra Pratap Singh Vs DCIT (ITAT Lucknow)

Whether profit % can be applied on estimate basis if books of accounts are rejected, without reference to earlier year’s profit % where books were accounts were not rejected or whether the Assessing Officer is justified in Assessing the profit at a rate higher than earlier year in which profit was assessed by Assessing officer without s...

Even if Assessee fails to appear or attend his case CIT (A) should decide appeal on merits

Shri Poojan Kinnerkumar Patel vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

In our considered view, even if the assessee failed to put-in appearance, it is the duty of the CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal on merit on the basis of material available on record. Our view finds support from the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of VODAFONE ESSAR LTD Vs. DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL–II & Ors. in W.P....

Books cannot be rejected without verifying, merely on the ground that its afterthought of the Assessee

Shri Bhavesh I.Gandhi Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

It was incumbent upon the Assessing Officer to examine the books of accounts with the related evidences and documents and thereafter should have arrived at a decision. Without verification of books of accounts produced before him and bringing any material on record, the Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the books of account...

If once income is already assessed by AO u/s. 44AE no separate addition to income can be made

Shri Amitkumar Hasmukhbhai Shah Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

The contention of the assessee is that he has shown income from truck under section 44AE of Rs. 2,01,000/- which includes income of Rs.1,07,890/- from M/s. Chandan Carriers, and therefore, no separate addition of Rs.1,07,890/- is warranted. None of the lower authorities has verified this contention of the assessee. ...

271(1)(c) : Penalty cannot be imposed merely because assessee didn’t objected to addition

Consolidated Finvest & Holdings Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

However, it is a well-settled proposition that the quantum of penalty proceedings are separate proceedings and penalty cannot be imposed merely on the ground that the assessee did not challenge or agitate the issue before higher forum and accepted the disallowance made by the AO. ...

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,871)
Company Law (10,064)
Corporate Law (13,542)
Custom Duty (10,819)
DGFT (5,156)
Excise Duty (5,616)
Fema / RBI (5,765)
Finance (6,487)
Income Tax (49,813)
SEBI (5,335)
Service Tax (4,889)