Cases Income tax

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

The question in the present case is as to whether the information received from the investigation wing/search team would constitute ‘reason to believe’ empowering the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment u/s 147/148. Answer is given by ITAT Ahmedabad on 12/11/2020 in the case of Hitesh Ashok Vaswani Vs DCIT. https://www.bpmundraca.com/it-cases-240-2021/
Can Ld. AO disallow the certain percentages of expenses when the expenses are supported only by self made vouchers and AR agreed to disallowance without pointing out any specific instances of unverifiable element therein? ITAT Kolkata decided on Apr 28, 2021. Section 143(3). Kindly click the link to get the order. https://www.bpmundraca.com/it-cases-239-2021/
To take the benefit of section 54F, unutilized portion of the capital gain on the sale of property used for residence should be deposited before the date of furnishing the return of tax under Section 139 as mentioned in section 54(2). Therefore, Section 139 cannot be confined only to the provisions of the Section 139(1), but it includes all the sub section of Section 139. In the case of DIPAL SURESHBHAI PATEL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER. ITAT AHMEDABAD on Apr 15, 2021. Section 54F, 139, 143(3), 54(2). In favour of the assessee. Ca BPMUNDRA
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
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
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.
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.
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)
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/
Demonetization . Deposit of cash into bank. Before making addition for cash deposit into bank during Demonetization period the Ld. AO has to consider on merits the opening balance for which evidence were produced for allowing credit of cash withdrawal, financials of previous years and audit report if any. Accordingly, the issues raised in this appeal are restored to the files of the Assessing Officer. ITAT- Bangalore in the case of Sri Mohan Ramachandra Basawa, … vs ITO on on 20 January, 2021. Section 68, 69A and 115BBE: