While framing of assessment in pursuance of revisional order passed under section 263, AO was entitled to consider only those items which had been considered by CIT and was not entitled to consider any other item afresh for making addition.
Inatech India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) From the narration of facts with regard to the non disposal of the appeal of the Assessee, it is clear that the delay in non disposal of the appeal is not attributable to any default on the part of the assessee. The law is by now well […]
A1 Cuisines Private Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) Facts : Petitioner seeks issuance of Writ directing the respondent UOI to exempt the petitioner from charging applicable taxes under the GST legislations on sale of cosmetic products, perfumes etc. to the International passengers and claim refund of any input tax paid on input […]
PSN Automobiles Private Limited Vs. UOI & CBIC (Kerala High Court at Ernakulam) Petitioner, has submitted that the amount of 1% the dealer collects from the purchaser of a car worth more than ten lakhs, under Section 206C(1F) of the Income Tax Act, cannot be treated as an integral part of the value of the […]
Ayushi Patni Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune) Whether the assessee is eligible for claiming exemption u/s 54F in respect of residential flat / house for which the assessee has entered into an agreement for purchase more than one year before the date of transfer of capital asset? The dates qua, transfer of capital asset, execution of […]
Grants/Financial Assistance received by assessee, a Government Company, from the State Government for Development of Coal Block/Mines – Grants/Financial Assistance received from Mineral Development Fund (MDF) under the provisions of Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Fund Act r.w. Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Fund Rules towards Capital Outlays or incurment of capital expenditure would be in the nature of capital receipts not chargeable to tax
Assessee is a corporation of the Chhattisgarh Government and has received subsidies for opening a mine. Assessee treated the said subsidy as ‘capital receipt’, however, department contended it to be ‘revenue receipt’.
Since final consideration was paid and the possession of flat was received within a period of one year prior to the date of transfer of capital asset, then the same should be considered as the date of purchase, so as to allow the benefit of deduction under section 54F to assessee.
Shri Surya Prakash Loonker Vs M/s Excel Rasayan Pvt. Ltd (NAA) it is clear that the Respondent has admittedly not passed on the benefit of tax reduction since the base prices of the above two products were increased to maintain the same selling prices which were existing before the reduction in the rate of tax. […]
Armoury International Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) In this case, the assessee was observed to have made bogus purchases as per information received from the Sales Tax Department. The assessee was issued notice u/s. 148 on 11.03.2013 served on 12.03.2013. The assessee filed revised return of income on 15.03.2013, wherein the amount of bogus purchase was offered […]
