S. 145A : Method of accounting–Valuation-MODVAT credit does not have any impact on profit of assessee and thus, unutilised MODVAT credit could not be added to value of closing stock.
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 180 ITD 776 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 145A : Method of accounting–Valuation-MODVAT credit does not have any impact on profit of assessee and thus, unutilised MODVAT credit could not be added to value of closing stock.
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 180 ITD 776 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 120 : Jurisdiction of income-tax authorities-Additional Commissioner can function as an AO only when jurisdiction has been assigned to him-No directions or orders assessment order passed by Additional Commissioner was illegal and without jurisdiction. [S. 120(4)(b), 124]
Nasir Ali v. ACIT (2020) 181 ITD 30 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 80HHC : Export business–Sale of scrap-Income from such scrap would tantamount to recoupment of cost of raw material/production and, therefore, was includible in profits of business.
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 180 ITD 776 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Labour expenses-ad hoc disallowance-Held to be not justified. [S. 145]
ITO v. Swati Housing & Construction (P.) Ltd. (2020) 180 ITD 854 (Delhi) (Trib.)S. 69A : Unexplained money–Bank deposits–Evidence was not considered–Matter remanded. [S. 45]
Raghubir Singh v. ITO (2020) 180 ITD 719 (Chd.)(Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits–Gifts from father–Source explained–Addition is deleted.
Kuldeep Singh v. ITO (2020) 180 ITD 749/ 185 DTR 10/ 203 TTJ 242 (Chd.)(Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits–Sundry creditors-From earlier years-No addition can be made.
ITO v. Swati Housing & Construction (P.) Ltd. (2020) 180 ITD 854 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 68 : Cash credits–Books of account-No addition can be made owing to difference in income based on Form No. 26AS and income as reflected in books of account maintained by assessee. [S. 145]
D M Estates (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 180 ITD 813 (Bang.)(Trib.)S. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Perpetual lease–Purchase of property-Entitle for exemption. [S. 2(47)(vi), 45, 269UA]
N. Ramaswamy v. ITO (2020) 180 ITD 702 / 190 DTR 374/ 205 TTJ 803(Chennai)(Trib.)S. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Purchase of flat-Mere fact that assessee was one of associated parties in said concern which was developing housing project, could not be a ground to deny benefit of deduction.[S. 45]
Lalitkumar Kesarimal Jain v. DCIT (2020) 77 ITR 394 / 180 ITD 832 / 190 DTR 424/ 205 TTJ 753 (Pune)(Trib.) Kruti Lalit Kumar Jain v. DCIT (2020) 77 ITR 394/ 180 ITD 832/ 190 DTR 424/ 205 TTJ 753 (Pune) (Trib.) Pranay Lalit Kumar Jain v. DCIT (2020) 77 ITR 394/ 180 ITD 832 / 190 DTR 424/ 205 TTJ 753 (Pune) (Trib.)