Category: ITAT
Addition u/s 69 confirmed when assessee failed to establish link between cash withdrawn and cash found at the time of search In a recent judgment, ITAT Hyderabad has confirmed Addition u/s 69 when assessee failed to establish link between cash withdrawn and cash found at the time of …
Without treating assessee as “assessee in default” u/s 201(1), no disallowance can be made u/s 40(a)(ia) for non deduction of tax at source ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2752 (2019) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the partiesCIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township P Ltd reported in …
Software expenses on Global Dealers Management System of Hyundai motor held to be revenue in nature as it was a recurring expense for better efficiency of running business ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2751 (2019) (01) ITAT The solitary issue in the instant case was whether software expenses …
Penalty u/s 271D unjustified when bank refused loan and cash was obtained for meeting urgent business expenses as it was a reasonable cause u/s 273B ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2750 (2019) (01) ITAT The instant appeal by the assessee was against the order passed by the Commissioner …
Penalty u/s 271D was absurd when assessee himself was karta of HUF from where he obtained cash loan-ITAT deleted penalty for violation of section 269SS ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2749 (2019) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Rajendra Suryavanshi Vs ACIT (2011) 141 …
Taxability of interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894. ITAT quashed CIT order believing that division bench order of the Supreme Court was not good law ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2748 (2019) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: Ghanshyam, HUF reported at 315 …
No penalty u/s 271D can be levied when cash loans were treated as undisclosed income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2743 (2019) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: Diwan Enterprises vs. CIT CIT vs. Standard …
Prosecution u/s 278B without proof of service of notice u/s 2(35) expressing intention treating a person as Principal Officer of the Company quashed ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2740 (2019) (01) AC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon:V.P. Punj Vs. Asstt. CIT, 2001, 119 TAXMAN 543 Delhi, Sushil Suri and Ors. Vs. State & Ors. (2008) 303 ITR 86 Madhumilan Syntex Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Union of India (SC)Greatway (P) Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Asstt. CIT, 199 ITR 391 (P&C),ITO Vs. Roshini Cold Storage (P) Ltd. and Ors., (2000) 245 ITR 322 (Mad)Income Tax …
ITAT analyses validity of notice u/s 143(2) by non jurisdictional AO. On objection, AO obligated to refer matter for determination of jurisdiction u/s 124(2) ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2739 (2019) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC) …
When assessee during assessment proceedings voluntarily admitted mistake then mere absence of revised return would not justify penalty u/s 271(1)(c) ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2738 (2019) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: CIT Vs. Man Industries Ltd.(2018) 164 DTR (Bom) 165 CIT Vs. Somany Evergreen Knits …
