Category: ITAT
Addition u/s 69B for difference in stock from statement given to Bank deleted as in preceding year it was deleted following High Court judgment ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3105 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT vs. Sidhu Rice & General Mills, 281 ITR …
No Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for mere disallowance in quantum proceedings in the absence of any falsity in the explanation offered ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3104 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Limited (322 ITR 158) (sc)Price Waterhouse Coopers …
Assessee is eligible for the deduction of the amount embezzled by the employee as a trading loss u/s 28 of the Income Tax Act ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3103 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Dinesh Mills Ltd. 254 ITR 673 The appeal had …
Mere reflection of income in P&L Account does not make it business income. Books of accounts not conclusive evidence to determine income under a particular head ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3102 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Sutlej Cotton Mills Vs. CIT, West Bengal …
Exemption u/s 54F could not be denied for fraud by builder in constructing building without NOC not disclosed to the assessee ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3101 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Kanan Chandra Sekhar vs. ITO, 165 ITD 315Dileep Ranjrekar, 101 taxman.com 104Balkishan …
Allowability of Exemption u/s 54 where new residential property used partly for commercial purposes . ITAT remanded case for verification of the proposition ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3100 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Seema Sabharwala vs. Income Tax OfficerM. Subramanian vs. DCIT i …
Change of opinion not permissible for invoking proceedings u/s 147. ITAT quashed reassessment for payment of managerial remuneration in proprietorship firm ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3099 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.: 320 ITR 561(SC) The instant appeal …
Issue of notice u/s 148 by Non jurisdictional AO not valid. Section 292BB not applicable where assessee had already objected the issue before AO ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3096 (2019) (08) ITAT The instant appeal filed by the assessee was directed against the order of CIT(A). The assessee …
Revision u/s 263 upheld as AO failed to initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) where assessee increased income in revised return filed u/s 148 ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3091 (2019) (07) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties:CIT v. Bhikaji Dadabhai and Co. 42 ITR 123ACIT vs. …
Deduction u/s 80JJAA There is no requirement of atleast 100 new workmen to be employed to claim deduction ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3090 (2019) (07) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties:Panacea Biotec Ltd. Vs. ACIT 122 ITD 199 The instant appeal by the Assessee was …