Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


ITO v. Design Deal Fashions P. Ltd. (2024)111 ITR 22 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Share capital-Filed names of lenders, Permanent Account Numbers, addresses and Income-Tax Returns, credit worthiness, bank statement-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed-Unsecured creditors-Replied too notices and filed confirmation-Not appeared before Assessing Officer-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed-Statement recorded during search-Opportunity of cross examination is not given-Opening balance cannot be added. [S.133(6)]

DCIT v. Jaymala Infrastructure P. Ltd (Mum) (Trib) (UR)

S. 68: Cash credits-Share capital-Need not prove source of the source-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed. [S. 131,133(6)]

Naresh Navlani v. DCIT (Indore)(Trib)(UR)

S. 68: Cash credits-Unexplained loan-Burden of Proof-Assessee submitted primary documents establishing identity and creditworthiness of creditor and genuineness of loan-Addition is deleted.

Raj Auto Wheels P Ltd v ACIT, (2024) 111 ITR 199 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Customer advances-Accepted in earlier years and latter years-Addition is deleted.

Fashion Zone v. Jt. CIT (2024) 111 ITR 138 (Chd)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Unexplained cash deposits-Demonetisation-No defects in the books of account-Stock register-Cash sales duly offered to tax have been accepted-Bringing the realization of sale proceeds in cash to tax will amount to double taxation and the same is clearly unsustainable in law.[S. 145]

Keep Learning Resources P. Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 112 ITR 731 /231 TTJ 340/243 DTR 46 (Mum)(Trib.)

S. 56 : Income from other sources-Share premium-Valuation of shares of company on NAV method and its subsidiary on DCF method-Method adopted by Assessee to be accepted.[S.56(2)(viib), R. 11UA]

Abdul Nayab Shaikh (Deceased) v. ITO (Mum)(Trib) (UR)

S. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Joint names-Income has to be assessed in the right person-Indexation benefit is available. [S. 4, 45, 54]

Siddhulal Patidar v. ITO, (2024) 111 ITR 541 /228 TTJ 791/236 DTR 262 (Indore)(Trib.)

S. 54B : Capital gains-Land used for agricultural purposes-Entitled to exemptions even if the new land is registered in the name of his son-Investment by assessee in new land from sale proceeds of old land, even if made before registration of sale-deed, was eligible for exemption. [S. 45]

Jignesh Jaysukhlal Ghiya v. DCIT (2024] 166 taxmann.com 40 (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Utilized other funds (apart from sale consideration) for constructing new residential house-Deduction under section 54 could not be denied [S. 139(4)]

Rita Sunil Shah v. ITO (IT) (2024) 112 ITR 30 (SN) (Mum)(Trib.) Sunil Amritlal Shah v. ITO (IT) (2024) 112 ITR 30 (SN) (Mum)(Trib.)

S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Capital gains exemption-Date of possession-Date of agreement-Date of possession considered as date of purchase-Beneficial provisions to be liberally interpreted.[S.45, 144C, 147]