Though the case has a chequered history and the facts are long the matter lies within a short compass. The core question is one relating to the maintainability of the suit, viz., O.S. No.106 of 2009 filed by the second respondent – Nandini seeking partition wherein the order of injunction was passed.
Both AO & CIT-A have denied the claim of exemption of Rs.40,00,000/- for want of proper evidence showing the capital gains were invested in specified bonds i.e provided by the Government of India, National Highway Authority Bonds (NHAI). The deduction u/s. 54EC of the Act is permissible if the amount representing the long term capital gain is invested in specified bonds within prescribed time.
Shiv Public School Managing Committee Vs. CIT (Exemptions) (ITAT Delhi) 1. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : the application moved by the assessee society for registration under section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and for according sanction u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act have been rejected by the […]
EPCOS India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata) Briefly stated facts are that the assessee in the present case is a private limited company and engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of soft ferrite components, DC and AC capacitors, metalized films etc. The assessee in the year under consideration has claimed expenses under […]
As Prior to assessment year 2015-16 no restriction was placed by the legislature in respect of investments in the residential houses that an assessee could make for claiming deduction under section 54 of the Act. We thus are of the view that the claim of deduction raised by the assessee under section 54 in respect of investment made towards purchase of residential house at Mumbai and Pune was well in order.
New Consolidated Construction Company Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) The assessee conceded that to buy peace of mind he was ready to accept the percentage as consistently applied by the Tribunal in other cases. When a query was put to the revenue he also fairly agreed for a reasonable percentage. ITAT held that Profit rate […]
Considering the nature of business of assessee, i.e., consultancy services carried out from residence, possibility of personal use of the car could not be ruled out, therefore, AO was justified in disallowing part of vehicle running and maintenance expenses.
As petitioner could not file appeal earlier because of non-constitution of the Appellate Authority, which has now been appointed vide notification dated April 19, 2018, the appeal filed by the appellant shall not be dismissed only on account of delay.
Gujarat High Court rules partnership firm discharged onus under Section 68 by identifying partner & confirming contribution; creditworthiness inquiry is on partner.
Assessing Officer in disallowing the claim of Depreciation amounting to Rs. 91,87,713/- on the alleged plea that the Film Projector is to be depreciated @ 15% instead of 60%,