-
Section 14A For the purpose of computing disallowance u/s 14A of the Act instead of taking into account total investment, only such investments which yielded exempt dividend income during the year are required to be considered for the purpose of disallowance. RELIGARE SECURITIES LTD. & ANR. vs. DCIT. In favour of Assessee. ITAT Delhi
-
Section 14A envisages that there has to be an actual receipt of exempt income during the relevant previous year for purpose of making any disallowance u/s 14A, Section 2(22)(e) do not apply when transactions are trading business transactions and The provisions of section 50C cannot be incorporated in the computation of block of the assets. DCIT vs. FUTURZ NEXT SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED. AY 2013-14
-
Section 69A, 69B, 148, 254 CHANDULAL AMRUTLAL SHAH (HUF) & ORS. vs. ITO May 4, 2020 ITAT SURAT AY 2000-01 & 2004-05. Supreme Court in the case of MCorp Global (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 309 ITR 434 (SC) held that It is well-settled that the Tribunal is not authorized to take back the benefit granted to the assessee by the Assessing Officer. It has no power to enhance the assessment. In view of the statutory provisions. AO cannot enhanced the income originally assessed under section 143 (3) in set-aside proceeding in consequence of direction of the tribunal.
-
The AO is not hand writing expert to distinguish the signature of the karigar as appearing in the salary register and this cannot be solitary ground to reject the books of accounts. No GP addition is sustained when no defects have been pointed out by the AO in the the relevant records produced by the assessee in form of export bills, purchased bills and cash books etc. along with books of accounts and also submit the reason of fall in GP.
-
ITAT Ahmedabad on 11th March, 2020-Diary seized, surrender made and survey statement recorded under section 133A. But having no corroborative evidences. Exorbitant profit is not possible in the line of business of the assessee. No other business is found. No unexplained investment is found. It was held that Since it is business receipt only GP based on past history can be added as income.