-
Section 132 When no incriminating material is shown by the Ld. AO therefore disallowance made only on ad-hoc basis is not permissible under the Income Tax Act. SHARUK PASSI & ANR. vs.DCIT ITAT Delhi order on Mar 19, 2020. IT-CASES-213-2020
-
Section 132, 153A Assessment was completed under section 143(1). Completed assessments can be interfered with by A.O. while making assessment under section 153A only on basis of some incriminating material unearthed during course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in course of original assessment. ACIT v. SHRI SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA 30.9.2020 Delhi ITAT IT-CASES-211-2020
-
Section 144 r.w. Section 145(3): ITAT JAIPUR on Jun 19, 2020 held that Even if the books f accounts rejected by invoking provisions of Section 145(3) due doubt on genuineness of the purchases, the A.O. is bound to frame the assessment on best assessment as per provisions of Section 144 r.w. Section 145(3). Therefore, after rejection of books of account, the A.O. is required to estimate the income of the assessee on some reasonable and proper basis. Once the past year results have attained finality and not in dispute, the same can form the basis for estimating the GP rate for the current year. KEDIA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. & ANR. vs. ACIT. AY 2009-10, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Decision in favour of Assessee
-
Section 127, 132(4) HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY on Jul 15, 2019 held that when the assessment of an Assessee is being transferred from one Commissionerate to another, the requirement of hearing and following the principle of natural justice is inbuilt in the statutory provisions contained in Section 127 of the Act. Therefore the giving of notice to the assessee containing the reasons and the statements or even the gist of the statements to the extent relevant for the proposed action is a basic postulate. The views of the noticee are to be considered by the authority before taking any decision to confirm or drop the notice. A show cause notice to be effective must be adequate so as to enable a party to effectively object/respond to the same. The authority concerned is obliged to consider the objections, if any, and thereafter, reach a finding one way or the other. The impugned order is quashed. NARESH MANAKCHAND JAIN vs PCIT. IN favour of the assessee.
-
Section 32, 37, 36(1)(iii), 37(1), 131, 133A, 56, 147 AY 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 After going through the various terms of the deed if it is loan/finance arrangement between the parties then the assessee is entitled only to claim interest as expenditure u/s 36 (1) (iii) and depreciation and is not entitled to claim the principal component of alleged lease rent paid as ‘revenue expenditure’ u/s 37(1). FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD. vs. ACIT ITAT CHANDIGARH May 6, 2020
-
Gujarat High Court on 11 February, 2020 held that if Employees contribution to PF account as well as ESI contribution deposited timely as per section 36(1)(va) then only the deduction is allowable. Kindly note that law as propounded by case laws is different in different States. Kindly further note that this is relating to Employee contribution not employer contribution. PCIT vs M/S Suzlon Energy Ltd.
-
ITAT HYDERABAD on 29th April 2020 held that the sale of the property by the Vendee cum AGPA-holder cannot be considered as sale of property by the assessee when the Vendee has paid the entire sale consideration and has taken possession of the property as the Vendee becomes the owner of the property u/s.53A of the TP Act and u/s.2(47) it is a transfer of the property. Further it is worth noting that except being described as the Vendor, the assessee is neither a signatory to the subsequent Sale Deed nor is he the recipient of any of the sale consideration. In SAMA OM REDDY vs. ITO
-
During lock down period- the AO has acted with undue haste in passing the orders under Section 201(1)(1A) of the Act.- The writ was allowed for quashing the order passed under Section 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961- the demand notice. Immediately after the lockdown is withdrawn by the Government, a period of two weeks reckoned therefrom is granted to the petitioner to reply to the Notices to the show cause issued by the respondent.
-
Madras High Court decision on 5 March, 2020 on stay of demand-consequences of not depositing of 20% of total demand within 30 days alongwith stay application- CBDT’s instruction on stay of demand
-
Activity of the assessee are primarily motivated with the objective of promoting handloom sector in India and said activity are not for gain or profit of an individual. The executive committee of the Society also consist of all government officials with no motive of profit sharing or personal interest. The member subscription is received by the assessee in proportion of the supply by the agency and the rate decided. The said subscription fee received cannot be equated with the cess or fee against services rendered. The AO is not justified in holding that provision to section 2(15) will be attracted in the case of the assessee and therefore qualifies for exemption under section 11.