As we understand, the assessee has not preferred a writ petition against reassessment proceedings for AY 2013-14 on the ground that the same is time-barred. The assessee has chosen to participate in the reassessment proceedings. Therefore, the assessee should respond to the questionnaires issued by the Department. If the notices for AY 2013-14 are held… (read more)

Take the grounds on natural justice . Prepare additional evidence before the CIT(A and file the same along with affidavit. Try to get the confirmation from the parties . Demonstrate the quantity tally along with movement of goods , such as stock register , lorry receipt etc . In PCIT v. S. V. Jiwani (2022)… (read more)

The facts of the case will have to be analysed further to provide a comment on the issue. Refer K. P. Abdul Majeed. v. ACIT (2019) 267 taxman 151 / 414 ITR 531 / 180 DTR 249 / 310 CTR 261 (Ker.)(HC), the theory of peak credit can be applied . The burden is on… (read more)

The transaction of conversion of proprietorship to an LLP is separate from the introduction of assets in the firm. Conversion will not have any tax implications. The introduction of assets in a firm will attract section 45(3) of the Act. (read more)

This depends from case to case. If there is an incorrect assumption of jurisdiction, the same may be challenged by filing a Writ Petition before the jurisdictional High Court. One can also file a rectification application if there is an apparent mistake in the order. (read more)

Section 44AD of the Act is for presumptive income from Business. The burden is on the assessee to prove that money lending is the business of the assessee. PCIT v. Mohan Bhagwatprasad Agrawal (2020) 425 ITR 119 / 270 Taxman 126 / 115 taxmann.com 69 / 270 Taxman 126 (Guj.)(HC) . Depends on facts of… (read more)

As we understand, the building was a business asset and depreciation was claimed. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Meena V. Pamnani (Smt.) v. CIT (2017) 159 DTR 1/251 Taxman 100/( 2018) 404 ITR 548 (Bom) (HC) held that once depreciation is allowed on an asset it would remain a business asset… (read more)

The time limit for settlement under VSVA and IDS is over. There is no amnesty scheme available to the assessee. (read more)

Yes, if other conditions are satisfied, an assessee would be allowed to settle an appeal under VSVA. The settlement is appeal-wise and not issue-wise. Assuming the appeal of the revenue before the ITAT was condoned. The assessee could still settle the revenue under VSVA and would be subjected to the same liability. (read more)

Yes, the action of the Assessing Officer is valid. The Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of PCIT v. Manju Osatwal (2022) 433 ITR 107 (Cal) (HC) held that once a declaration made by the assessee under Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (IDS) has been accepted by Principal Commissioner, such authority is estopped from… (read more)