PROVIDE ME ALL THE JUDGEMENTS THAT ARE IN THE FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO JURIDICTION
► Read Answer
Search & Sezure action u/s 132 was conducted on 19.06.2018. Assessments for the A.Y. 2013-14 to 2018-19 were completed u/s 153A on 14.08.20121. Assessment for the Assessment Year 2019-20 was completed u/s 143(3). The Government has extended date from time to time to complete the assessment u/s 143(3). In the light of extended period what is last date to complete the assessment u/s 143(3) for AO for the Year 2019-20. Kinly inform about latest circular on the subject. It is also requested to please inform whether prior approval to select the case for scrutiny (part priod is searched period) is…
► Read Answer
Sir, In one case, the CIT u/s 263 has set aside an assesssment u/s143(3) for a particular issue to be verfied by the assessing officer. However for the same assessment year, the assessing officer has re opened u/s 147 on another issue. Whether two proceedings is possible for same assesment year. How to proceed to re opening notice, pl advice
► Read Answer
1.Assessment was completed u/s 143(3)/147 making additions on account of discrepancies found in survey on account of Cash in hand and Stock in trade etc. 2.On appeal the additions made by A.O. were confirmed by CIT(A) vide order dated 06/02/2020 and ITAT order dated 08/07/2016. 3.Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.4,60,000 was levied vide order dated 26/04/2017. 4.On appeal CIT(A) deleted the Penalty on the sole ground taken regarding limitation stating that - "order of the ITAT was passed on 08/07/2016 , therefore the penalty order must have been passed by the A.O. upto 31/03/2017. However the A.O. has passed the…
► Read Answer
Additions were made in the Assessment order on account of discrepancies found in stock in trade ,cash in hand etc. The same was confirmed by CIT(A) and also by ITAT Penalty u/s 271(1)(C) of Rs.600000 was levied by A.O. The same was deleted by CIT(A) on the legal ground that the penalty was passed after 6 months from the date of ITAT order. The department has filed appeal against the order of CIT (A) deleting the aforesaid penalty on 2 grounds: 1.The order of ITAT was received in the office of CIT after 3 months from the date of ITAT…
► Read Answer
guidance value of an apartment which was booked with the builder during 2008, and took the possession in 2010. during the registration process, the builder registered under karnataka registration act the uds land portion cost ( based on guidance value) as per the agreement where as the construction cost of the apartment not included for registration purposes. it was practice generally followed by the builders for all the owners who so ever booked the property. During the relevant F.Y 2015 - 16 the assessee has sold house property for a consideration of Rs.1.00 crores as per sale deed document. The…
► Read Answer
Dear Sir, While filing ITR-3 for the A.Y. 2021-22. Declared the income under the head of "Income from the non-Specified profession without books of accounts" the filing software warning to fill the Balance Sheet and Profit & loss account for above-declared income. kindly help me with this issue. Thanking you, Mohamed Ali Tax Practitioner
► Read Answer
112A WHETHER FOR LTCG 112 A CAN BE OPTED AND LTC LOSS CAN BE CLAIMED SEPARATELY. MEANING THEREBY WHETHER ASSESSEE CAN OPT FOR 112A FOR GAIN AND OTHERS FOR LOSS ON EQUITY SALE AND ADJUST LOSS
► Read Answer
A partnership firm engaged in to real estate and construction activity. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. Officer had raised contention of calculating notional rent U/s 22 and 23 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2017-18 on 6 unsold completed units held as stock in trade of the business, for which BU permission was already received 1 year ago. The Ld. Officer computed notional rent and made addition under the head “Income from House Property”. Is the Officer right in making such addition, given the facts that the partnership firm (builder) was holding such unsold unit…
► Read Answer
In the aforesaid query the addition was made on account of investment in construction of house and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3)/147
► Read Answer
CAN WE QUESTION ON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF JURISDICTION