Latest Posts

Q.Is confirming of dis-allowance for Delayed deposit of employees contribution to PF and ESI u/s 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act, 1961 despite the assessee contributing/depositing the same before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act is justified after amendments in Explanation 5 of the section 43B.

17 total views

17 total views Q.Is confirming of dis-allowance for Delayed deposit of employees contribution to PF and ESI u/s 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act, 1961 despite the assessee contributing/depositing the same before the due date of filing of…
Read more

36(1)(va), 43B, Articles

Is confirming of dis-allowance for Delayed deposit of employees contribution to PF and ESI u/s 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act, 1961 despite the assessee contributing/depositing the same before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act is justified after amendmends in Explanation 5 of the section 43B. The ITAT- Kolkata in the case of Harendra Nath Biswas, Kolkata vs Dcit, Cir. 29, Kolkata on 16 July, 2021 ITA No.186/Kol/2021 decided the issue in favour of the assessee.

6 total views

6 total views Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Kolkata Harendra Nath Biswas, Kolkata vs Dcit, Cir. 29, Kolkata on 16 July, 2021 ITA No.186/Kol/2021 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P. M .Jagtap, Vice-President (KZ)…
Read more

36(1)(va), 43B, AY 2019-20, In Favour of Assessee, Kolkata tribunal

Section 147, 148, 143(3). If reopening within a period of four years of assessment u/s 143(3) then there is no bar for reopening of assessment If there is certain non-disclosure. But If reopening beyond four years for assessment already in u/s 143(3) then It must be established that the assessee has not disclosed fully and truly all material evidence with an intention to escape from the payment of tax. motive or intention on the part of the assessee for such non-disclosure is also a material ground. It is a case where the reopening beyond four years of assessment u/s 143(3) and the order of approval, which was validly granted, was produced before the Assessing Officer at the time of scrutiny and the Assessing Officer also accepted the approval order and granted exemption. Thus, the reason stated in the impugned proceedings that the assessee committed a mistake cannot be accepted. M/S.Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. … vs ACIT Madras High Court … on 16 June, 2021

88 total views

88 total views Madras High Court M/S.Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. … vs ACIT… on 16 June, 2021 W.P.No.43662 of 2016 Conclusion Section 147, 148, 143(3). If reopening within a period of four years of assessment u/s 143(3) then there is no…
Read more

143(3), 147, 148, AY 2009-10, madras High Court

Since books of account were not rejected, therefore, provisions of section 69B were wrongly invoked by AO. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4842 (Raj-HC) CIT v. Gaurav Kumar Sharma on dated 12 October, 2017

77 total views

77 total views 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4842 (Raj-HC) CIT v. Gaurav Kumar Sharma INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 Since books of account were not rejected, therefore, provisions of section 69B were wrongly invoked by AO. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4842 (Raj-HC) CIT v. Gaurav Kumar…
Read more

69B, AY 2008-09, RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

In E-Assessment order demand is raised without providing an opportunity by issue of show cause notice? Assessment void. In the case of RMSI PRIVATE LIMITED vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE HIGH COURT OF DELHI W.P.(C) 6482/2021 & CM APPL. 20366/2021 on dated Jul 14, 2021 Section 143(3), 144B(9) AY 2017-18

129 total views

129 total views RMSI PRIVATE LIMITED vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE HIGH COURT OF DELHI MANMOHAN & NAVIN CHAWLA, JJ. W.P.(C) 6482/2021 & CM APPL. 20366/2021 Jul 14, 2021 Section 143(3), 144B(9) AY 2017-18 Decision in favour of: Assessee In E-Assessment order…
Read more

143(3), 144B(9), 2019, Clause 5 (1) (viii), Clause 5 (x), E-Assessment Scheme

Even if the petitioner was not present before the Tribunal when the appeal was taken up for hearing, it could not have been dismissed. Dismissal of appeals by ITAT for non-persecution is wholly illegal and unjustified. Rule 24 of the 1963 Rules does not give power to the learned Tribunal to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. IN THE KERALA HIGH COURT in the case of Rabindra Kumar Mohanty v. Registrar, ITAT W.P.(C) No. 2487 of 2019 on dated 18 March, 2020. Section 254 IT Act and Rule 24 of Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963

118 total views

118 total views Section 254 IT Act and Rule 24 of Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 IN THE KERALA HIGH COURT C.R. DASH & S.K. PANIGRAHI, JJ. Rabindra Kumar Mohanty v. Registrar, ITAT W.P.(C) No. 2487 of 2019 18 March, 2020…
Read more

Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, Rule 24

Income Tax Slabs 2021 & Tax Rates for FY 2020-21

33 total views

33 total views income tax rates for FY 2021-22

Gift deed format

41 total views

41 total views CONFIRMATION OF GIFT I, Shri ,,., S/o.,, Aged 48 years R/o ……..r. do here by state on oath as under: – That my PAN No. is ,… That I am Prop. of ………../service at…. That Mr…………. s/o…….Aged …….
Read more

Articles, Format

Receipt of Software license amounting to Rs.86,05,13,407/- cannot be charged to tax as ‘Royalties’ under the DTAA. In the same manner, the amount will escape taxation as ‘Business profits’ under Article 7 also because of it not having any PE in India. Albeit Explanation 4 to section 9(1)(vi) is applicable to the year under consideration, but section 90(2) of Act states that where the Central Government has entered into an agreement with the Government of any country outside India under sub-section (1), then, in relation to the assessee to whom such agreement applies, the provisions of this Act shall apply to the extent they are more beneficial to that assessee. ANSYS INC. vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONL TAXATION) ITAT PUNE Jun 15, 2021 Section 9(1)(vi) and Article 12 of India-US DTAA. AY 2009-10 & 2014-15.Decision in favour of: Assessee

60 total views

60 total views Receipt of Software license amounting to Rs.86,05,13,407/- cannot be charged to tax as ‘Royalties’ under the DTAA. In the same manner, the amount will escape taxation as ‘Business profits’ under Article 7 also because of it not having…
Read more

9(1)(vi), Article 12 of India-US DTAA

Consequences when AO reopen the case only on the basis of valuation report or when no addition is made on account of reason recorded? ITAT CHANDIGARH passed the order in the case of FATEH HOMES PVT. LTD. vs. ITO ON 16.6.2021. IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. IT-CASES-246-2021.

74 total views

74 total views Consequences when AO reopen the case only on the basis of valuation report or when no addition is made on account of reason recorded? ITAT CHANDIGARH passed the order in the case of FATEH HOMES PVT. LTD. vs….
Read more

147, 148, 151, 151(1), AY 2009-10, AY 2010-11, AY 2011-12, borrowed satisfaction, Chandigarh ITAT, Concealment of income, In Favour of Assessee, Reason recorded, Reassessment