Corporate Law : HC directed Registrar (Administration) of bench to immediately circulate instructions to all Print, Electronic and Media Houses no...
Income Tax : In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Karnataka Planters Coffee Curing Works (P) Ltd. assessee had shown sudden increase i...
Income Tax : In the case of Shri Kaushik B. Patel Vs. D.C.I.T it was held by ITAT Ahmedabad that routine business transactions/salary payment...
Income Tax : In the case of Ms. Chaurasia & Sons. Vs. I.T.O the Hon’ble Kolkata ITAT held that mere confirmation of addition will not lead to...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata has held in the case ITO Vs. Piyush Jalan that where lending of money is substantial part of the business of the conc...
HC directed Registrar (Administration) of bench to immediately circulate instructions to all Print, Electronic and Media Houses not to publish the names of practitioners and individual judges as a part of news item unless it is so essentially required.
In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Karnataka Planters Coffee Curing Works (P) Ltd. assessee had shown sudden increase in creditors without any matching purchase transactions.
In the case of Shri Kaushik B. Patel Vs. D.C.I.T it was held by ITAT Ahmedabad that routine business transactions/salary payments do not fall under the purview of Deemed Dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. In this case the assessee’s books nowhere treat the sums received as loan and advances to have been received from the said Company.
In the case of Ms. Chaurasia & Sons. Vs. I.T.O the Hon’ble Kolkata ITAT held that mere confirmation of addition will not lead to conclusion that penalty is leviable, unless it is established that assessee has concealed its income.
ITAT Kolkata has held in the case ITO Vs. Piyush Jalan that where lending of money is substantial part of the business of the concerned company and any advance or loan is made by it to a shareholder in the ordinary course of its business
It has been held in case of Mukesh V. Prajapati Vs ITO (Ahmedabad ITAT), that the amount of cash credits shown as loan taken from various relatives , cannot be added as unexplained credit under sec 68 just on the presumption that the sources of the fund is not genuine
In the case of M/s. Jindal (India) Textiles Vs. ITO the Hon’ble ITAT held that once creditors’ identity, mode of payment and repayment, assessee’s books of accounts proved the impugned credit transactions
In the case of DCIT Vs. Raj Kumar Saraogi the Kolkata ITAT held that comparison with the items of jewellery found at the time of search with wealth tax return, which were filed much earlier was putting an onerous task on assessee to prove something impossible
In the case of Radha Nutirents Ltd. Vs. ITO the Hon’ble ITAT held that the assesse has failed to provide the loan confirmation of the loan received from Shri Kathirase Kumar and was also unable to provide an explanation as to why such confirmation could not be filed.
