Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Ramesh v. ITO (2024) 229 TTJ 746 / 238 DTR 57 / 38 NYPTTJ 547 (Jodhpur) (Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Income from undisclosed sources-Cash deposits in banks-Demonetization-Sale of goods-Deposited by customers-Addition is deleted. [s. 133(6)]

Kolaparthy Suvarna Lakshmi v. DCIT (2024) 229 TTJ 320 / 237 DTR 286 / 38 NYPTTJ 400 (Hyd)(Trib)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Disclosure of unexplained jewellery in the course of search-Income offered in the return of income-Assessing officer is justified in assessing the income as income from undisclosed sources and assessing the income at per section 115BBE of the Act.[S.155BE, 132]

G.T.S. Exports (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 229 TTJ 70 (UO) (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Cash deposit-Bank-Demonetization period-Sales-Addition is deleted.

Sanjaykumar Damjibhai Gangani v. ACIT (2024) 229 TTJ 97 (UO)/ 161 taxmann.com 606 (Surat) (Trib)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Long term capital gains-Allegation by SEBI-Price manipulation-Contract note of shares, demat details, details of bonus shares, etc were filed-Denial of exemption is not justified.[S. 10(38), 45]

Kediam Gem (P) Ltd. v.ITO (2024) 229 TTJ 344 / 236 DTR 369 / 38 NYPTTJ 397 / 164 taxmann.com 736 ((Surat) (Trib)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Cash deposits in bank account-demonetization period-Sales not doubted-Books of account not rejected-Addition is sustained only of 10 per cent of cash deposit to avoid the possibility of revenue leakage-Liable to be assessed as normal rate and not enhance rate as per S.115BBE of the Act. [S.115BBE]

Muthoot Agri Projects & Hospitalities (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 229 TTJ 468 / 237 DTR 220 / 38 NYPTTJ 439/ 164 taxmann.com 59 (Cochin)(Trib)

S. 57 : Income from other sources-Deductions Secured debentures-Interest income during pre-commencement period-Entire investment was out of borrowed funds-Interest expenditure is allowable as deduction. [S.56, 57(iii)]

West End Investment & Finance Consultancy Ltd. v. DCIT (2024) 229 TTJ 738 / 236 DTR 313 / 38 NYPTTJ 245/ 160 taxmann.com 679 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 56 : Income from other sources-Difference between purchase consideration and valuation made by DVO-An anti-avoidance provision-No infirmity in valuation report-There is no provision in the Act that before invoking the provisions of s. 56(2), the AO or the CIT(A) should prove with evidence that there is a transaction of on-money and then only addition can be made-Order of CIT(A) is affirmed. [S.56(2)(x)(b)]

ACIT v. Sharada Narayanan (2024) 229 TTJ 774 / 238 DTR 229 / 38 NYPTTJ 485 (Bang)(Trib)

S.54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Notarized Will-Sale of inherited jewellery-The Assessing Officer cannot ask the evidence beyond time specified in R. 6F(5)-Directed the assessee to reconcile the quantum of jewellery with the valuation report, matter remanded to the CIT(A) [S. 45, 56, R.6F(5)]

DCIT v. A.R. Sulphonates (P) Ltd.(2024) 229 TTJ 331 / 237 DTR 73 / 38 NYPTTJ 364 / 161 taxmann.com 451 (Kol) (Trib)

S. 50C : Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Capital asset-Stamp valuation-sale of leasehold rights in land-Industrial plot of land was allotted by MIDC under a lease agreement-Provision of S.50C is not applicable-Value of industrial plot of land was less than actual consideration-First and second proviso is applicable.[S.2(14), 45, 50C(1)]

ACIT v Vizag Seaport (P) Ltd. (2024) 229 TTJ 73) (UO) (Visakha (Trib)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Short deduction of TDS-No disallowance can be made-Action can be taken under section 201. [S. 194C, 194J]