It is a well settled position in law that assessment cannot be made in the name of a non-existing entity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375 (SC) where during pendency of assessment proceedings, assessee company was amalgamated with another company and thereby lost… (read more)

Section 54F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) is a beneficial provision granting exemption to the assessee. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. B.S. Shanthakumari 2015] 60 taxmann.com 74 (Karnataka)where assessee sold a property on 6-10-2008 and purchased another residential plot on 13-10-2008 and commenced construction, which was not… (read more)

Courts have held that the completed assessment could not be abated unless some incriminating evidence or material was found during search qua additions made by Assessing Officer . Refer following case laws; PCIT v. Caprihans India Ltd. (2020) 114 taxmann.com 103 (Bom.)(HC) CIT v. Deepak Kumar Agarwal ( 2017) 398 ITR 586/299 CTR 62/ 251… (read more)

Where income of any member of AOP exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax (i.e., basic exemption limit), the AOP shall be taxed at Maximum Marginal Rate i.e., 30 per cent plus surcharge and HEC as applicable. (read more)

Section 45(5A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was introduced vide Finance Act, 2017. According to the Memorandum explaining the provisions of the Finance Bill, 2017, these provisions were introduced to minimize the hardship faced by Land Owners when they enter into a Joint Development Agreement with a Developer, so that the transfer of land to… (read more)

There are diverging views on the issue. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Gouli Mahadevappa v. ITO [2013] 356 ITR 90 (Kan) (HC) held that where capital gain is assessed on notional basis under section 50C of the Act, whatever amount is invested in new residential house within prescribed period under… (read more)

If the expenditure is not claimed as deduction , there is no question of disallowance u/s 40A(3) or 40(3A) of the Act . In Smt. Sangeeta Verma v. CIT [2022] 284 Taxman 303 (All)(HC) held that, the affidavits filed by the assessee is clear recital that the purchasers insisted for cash payment. Their identity is… (read more)