AY 2010-11

(→ for subcategory see right ) (for subcategory scroll Below)

Consequences of absence of the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act before framing the assessment order? Answer order liable to to be quashed. RAM NIWAS JAIN vs.ITO. ITAT DELHI on 07-Jan-2021. Section 148: Consequences of granting approval by CIT in a mechanical manner by putting only “Yes”. Answer order liable to to be quashed. RAM NIWAS JAIN vs.ITO. ITAT DELHI on 07-Jan-2021.
अगर SVA की वैल्यूएशन DVO के वैल्यूएशन से ज्यादा आती है तो कर अधिकारी धारा 50C के प्रावधान के अनुसार कौन सी वैल्यू लेगा?ITAT Mumbai ने 18.11.2016 को Sangeeta Vijay Kumar, Mumbai vs Acit 25(2) को इसका ऑर्डर पास किया है।
क्या होगा जब कोई चैरिटेबल ऑर्गनाइजेशन को 148 का नोटिस इस आधार पर मिलता है कि करदाता धारा 11 और 12 की छूट का अधिकारी 12AA मिलने के पहले के एसेसमेंट ईयर के लिए नहीं है? Nov 26, 2020 को ITAT BANGALORE ने second proviso to sec.12A(2) का हवाला देकर ऑर्डर पास किया है KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND vs ITO.
Section 148, 147:Client Code Modification is reason to suspect and not reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Re-assessment is quashed. STRATAGEM PORTFOLIO (P.) LTD. vs. DCIT. ITAT DELHI BENCH AY 2010-11. In favour of Assessee.
Section 43(1), 143(3), 263 ITAT KOLKATA on May 29, 2020 hold that the industrial promotion assistance it received was on capital account.
Rule 46A. The assessee submitted that additional evidence before the CIT(A), but the ‎CIT(A) has not admitted the same. The CIT(A) should have looked into the additional ‎evidences while arriving at the proper conclusion which the CIT(A) failed to do so. In the ‎present case, the assessment order was passed under Section 144 of the Act which shows that ‎the Assessing Officer has not seen any evidences while making additions. Thus, we are ‎admitting the additional evidence filed before the CIT(A). ‎ITAT DELHI on May 15, 2020 AY 2010-11‎. Rakesh Aggarwal vs. ITO
ITAT DELHI on Mar 19, 2020 cancelled the penalty levied as the notice issued by the AO was held as bad in law as it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings had been initiated under i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. ADMAN ADVERTISING vs ACIT
ITAT DELHI on 20th Feb; 2020 held that when Documents / information found during the course of search under section 132(1) of the Act- ‎permissible proceedings- only under section 153C of the Act and hence assumption of ‎jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and notice issued under section 143(2) ‎of the Act is not valid notice and therefore the order passed is annulled. ‎Ananya Portfolio (P) Ltd. v. ITO- IT-CASES-203-2020
ITAT Mumbai on 16th March 2020 held that In case of bogus bill found where actual purchases were made by cash, method of peak credit as adopted by AO would not be a suitable method rather an adhoc estimated addition would meet cause of justice
ITAT Mumbai on 16th March 2020 held that to make addition in Section 69C it is postulated that source of expenditure incurred not found satisfactory by Ld. AO. When purchases were reversed by the assessee in subsequent years and the transactions of purchases as well as sales were stated to be mere paper entries. The such stock purchased was reflected in closing stock. Thus it is circular transactions and are mere paper entries and no addition can be made u/s 69C.