Category: Judgments
Unexplained expendiure addition u/s 69C made for peak negative cash balance without giving benefit of capitalisation of sums disclosed in earlier assessment years deleted INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, NEW DELHI (CIRCUIT BENCH AT MEERUT) ITA No. 6787/DEL/2011 (Asstt. Year: 2011-12) Rajeev Rastogi vs. ACIT Date of …
Deduction u/s 80IC available for manufacturing of PET bottles, Caps, jars etc. which are not plastic articles and do not fall in the negative list items mentioned in the 13th schedule. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI ITA No. 1309Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 ITO vs. M/s …
While reversing order of CIT(A), Tribunal duty bound to examine and discuss reasons given While reversing the order of the CIT(A) the Tribunal is duty bound to examine and discuss the reasons given by the CIT(A) to hold one way or the other and then to dispel those …
Deduction 33AB first allowed from composite income before apportionment under Rule 8(1) between agricultural non-agricultural The deduction u/s 33AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 shall be allowed from the total composite income derived from growing and manufacturing tea and only after such deduction is made, Rule 8(1) shall be …
Loans Advance given on interest not deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) as shareholder not derive benefit from funds of company When the company was compensated by way of interest on loan taken, the assessee shareholder in real sense did not derive any benefit from the funds of the Company …
Property Fair market value as on 01-04-1981 based on market rates taken from Sub-Registry records not without basis The fair market value of the property as on 01.04.1981 by the Registered Valuer on the basis of prevailing market rate from the relevant records of Sub-Registry Office as well as …
Allowability of interest as cost of acquisition of capital asset u/s 48(ii) is highly debatable, not open for revision u/s 263 by CIT The issue relating to the allowability of interest as the part of cost of acquisition of the capital asset under section 48(ii) is highly debatable …
CIT Appeals order passed ex parte without giving another opportunity or mentioning reasons for additions sustained is bad INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘A’, KOLKATA ITA No. 766/Kol/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-2010 Asish Ranjan Chowdhury (APPELLANT) vs. I.T.O. (RESPONDENT) Date of Order: 11/03/2016 ORDER Per Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M. …
CIT Revision u/s 263 unjustified alleging wiping out income surrendered u/s 133A treating it business income and not separately u/s 69A INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR I.T.A No. 203(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s Superfine Agro Industries (Appellant) vs. Income Tax Officer (Respondent) Date of Order: 10/03/2016 ORDER PER T. …
Revision u/s 263 not justified in case of best judgment assessment u/s 144 for non co-operation by assessee INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR I.T.A No. 220(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s Sutlej Wine Enterprises (Appellant) vs. PrCIT (Respondent) Date of Order: 10/03/2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): …
