Monthly Archive: March 2021

Writ petition filed for quashing and setting aside of show cause Notice is dismissed since Neither it is a case of lack of jurisdiction nor any violation of principles of natural justice is alleged so as to entertain the writ petition at the stage of notice and also when opportunity of filing reply personal / hearing was available. In the case of GENUS POWER INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. vs. CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX by HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 185/2021 on dated Mar 3, 2021

GENUS POWER INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. vs. CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN INDERJEET SINGH, J. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 185/2021 Mar 3, 2021 Writ petition filed for quashing and setting aside of show cause Notice is dismissed…
Read more

Show Cause Notice, Show Cause Notice, Writ Petition, Writ Petition

Section 56(2)(vii)(b) When purchase transactions of immovable property were carried out in FY 2011-12 for which full consideration was also parted with the seller. Mere registration at later date would not cover a transaction in AY 2014-15 already executed in the earlier years. The Revenue is debarred. ITAT- Ranchi in the case of Bajrang Lal Naredi, Ranchi vs Ito,Ward-1(3), Jamshedpur on 20 January, 2020

Section 56(2)(vii)(b) When purchase transactions of immovable property were carried out in FY 2011-12 for which full consideration was also parted with the seller. Mere registration at later date would not cover a transaction in AY 2014-15 already executed in the…
Read more

56, 56(2)(vii)(b), AY 2012-13, AY 2014-15, In Favour of Assessee, ITAT Ranchi

If the assessee for bona fide reasons was unable to bring materials on record to factually prove its claim before the departmental authorities and comes forward to file additional evidences before the Tribunal to prove such fact, the assessee should not be prevented from doing so. It is in the interest of natural justice and fairplay to allow assessee to establish its claim Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Mumbai in the case of Fab Trade Private Limited, Mumbai vs Ito, Ward 15(1)(2), on 8 March, 2021.

If the assessee for bona fide reasons was unable to bring materials on record to factually prove its claim before the departmental authorities and comes forward to file additional evidences before the Tribunal to prove such fact, the assessee should…
Read more

46A Rule, Additional evidence, AY 2013-14, In Favour of Assessee, ITAT Mumbai, Rule 46A

Section 153A, 153C, 132(4). If no incriminating material is found during search, no addition could be made in respect of the assessments that had become final. Statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. PCIT Vs. ANAND KUMAR JAIN (HUF) & ORS. HIGH COURT OF DELHI on Feb 12, 2021. If any statement was to be construed as an incriminating material belonging to or pertaining to a person other than person searched (as referred to in Section 153A), then the only legal recourse available to the department was to proceed in terms of Section 153C of the Act by handing over the same to the AO who has jurisdiction over such person.

Section 153A, 153C, 132(4). If no incriminating material is found during search, no addition could be made in respect of the assessments that had become final. Statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating…
Read more

132, 132(4), 153A, 153C, AY 2010-11, Delhi High Court, In Favour of Assessee, incriminating material, Statement, Statement under section 132(4)

Addition for accommodation entries without making any independent enquiry from the suppliers nor allowed any cross-examination of the third party though specifically demanded by the assessee-company? ITAT Ahmedabad on 8th March 2021 hold that the addition is deleted as it based on hypothesis, conjectures and suspicion. In the case of ACIT Vs. Darshanam Life Space Pvt. Ltd. & Anr Section 143(3)

Q.Addition for accommodation entries without making any independent enquiry from the suppliers nor allowed any cross-examination of the third party though specifically demanded by the assessee-company? ITAT Ahmedabad on 8th March 2021 hold that the addition is deleted as it…
Read more

143(3), Accommodation Entries, Ahmedabad Tribunal, AY 2012-13, In Favour of Assessee

Section 68 Cash deposits in the bank and AO made the addition u/s 68 instead of u/s 69, and hence the addition made by the AO is unsustainable.DIRISALA BALA MURALI vs. ITO. ITAT VISHAKAPATNAM on Jul 29, 2020. https://www.bpmundraca.com/it-cases-232-2021/

Section 68 Cash deposits in the bank and AO made the addition u/s 68 instead of u/s 69, and hence the addition made by the AO is unsustainable.DIRISALA BALA MURALI vs. ITO. ITAT VISHAKAPATNAM on Jul 29, 2020 As…
Read more

148, 68, 69, AY 2011-12, In Favour of Assessee, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH