-
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
-
ITAT DELHI on Mar 11, 2020 held in Penny stock- The assessee submitted sufficient documentary evidences before A.O. The A.O. has not brought any adverse material against the assessee so as to make the above additions. The interim order of the SEBI have been revoked against the assessee. The denial of right of cross-examination is a flaw which renders the assessment order a nullity. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram 125 ITR 713 (SC) and Andaman Timber Industries vs., CCE 314 ELT 641.
-
Unless the bad debt is written off by debiting to the P&L account and the debtors’ account should be credited, the condition as contemplated u/s. 36(1)(vii) is not satisfied. judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank Ltd. (supra) relied on by the assessee’s Counsel applies mainly to Banking companies Regarding allowability of Provision for bad debts. No infirmity was found in exercising power u/s 263 by CIT
-
No Penalty 271(1)(c) ITAT Chandigarh held that since the income has already been declared in the valid revised return (though after service of Summons issued by ADIT (inv.)) filed within the limitation period prescribed for filing the same therefore, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect of the aforesaid income declared is not leviable and the same is accordingly ordered to be deleted. Penalty u/s 271AAC can be levied only when there is an addition or disallowance and which it is deemed that he has evaded the payment of tax for computing the penalty so leviable. Smt. Parkash Kaur, Ludhiana vs ACIT
-
ITAT COCHIN held on Mar 13, 2020 that if Primary agricultural credit society give Loan for agricultural purpose then the assessee’s activities are in compliance with the activities of primary agricultural credit society and therefore claim of deduction u/s 80P(2) of the I.T. Act can not be denied.
-
Non-striking off of the relevant column of the show cause notice cannot be a valid reason for deletion of the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act if responded and participated in the proceedings. hence, matter was remanded back to CIT(A) for adjudication of the appeal on merits. ITO vs. RAJAN KALIMUTHU