My client is builder He is complying with all conditions mentioned in Section 80IBA , But he is following Project Completion Method to book the sales due to which at the time when Project Receives the completion certificate the builder executes the sale deed and book the sales . so every year he creates the work in progress and file the nil return . and in the year when he executes the sales he books the revenue . can he still claim benefit of 80IBA till the sale of all of units of project

read more

One of my friend filed the return for  the income tax and got the refund . The case got selected got scrutiny and they have disallowed the amount which is almost 6.5 lacs.they have stated that under reporting due to misreporting of an income which is 200%. I have paid the tax and interest agreeing to them as I am not aware of it. After that they have initatiated penalty of 200% which is almost 4.08 lacs. whether there is any chance of prosecution. Most of the things are misreported. I am salary assessed . Some CA,s are telling that pay the penalty in installment and sleep peacefully. Some of the other people are telling that if you are paying penalty it’s like u are agreeing to them and they can initiate the prosecution. I am salaried assessed and due to my friends mistake I am facing this issue. can you please let me know it is advisable to go for an appeal. If I go for an appeal or shall I pay the penalty in instalment. i am sole earner in my family with single mother

read more

please give a solution for the delay Condon for filing Form 10B AUDIT REPORT.

read more

When I was the Secretary of a Cooperative society, I filed an appeal at CIT against an order issued by IT department for paying a penalty of 2.45Cr against non filing of IT return. Appeal is pending. Now I resigned from the post of Secretary and new person assumed the charge of Secretary. My question is that how can I change the name in appeal as I resigned from the post of Secretary who is responsible for legal proceedings.

read more

Assessee received notice u/s 148A(b) dt. 16.08.2024. He file reply on 24.08.2024 mentioning as under:- Copy of Approval not provided with the notice u/s 148A(b) and order u/s 148A(d) but provided with  notice  u/s 148 which was issued on 31.08.2024. Asseessee asked for documents on the basis of which the department wants to re opening the case. The department issued notice on the basis of investigation report but no inquiry was conducted by  the officer who issued notice u/s 148A(b). The assessee asked for statement of the persons concerned and also cross examination of the person who issued statement but no opportunity was given and order was passed u/s 148A(d) Identity of  the AO who issued noticed u/s 148A(b), order u/s 148A(d) and even notice u/s 148 issued on 31.08.2024 has been disclosed. which is violation of face less assessment and is against various judgement passed by various High courts. The assesssee wants to know whether the notice u/s 148 is valid or not?

read more

The assessee sold a rural agriculture land in PY 2019-20 and the same  was not shown in original ITR and now reassessment is going on.   The assessee had receieved Rs. 37.5 lacs in cash and remaining payment through cheque. The assessee had given statement on oath u/s 131A that he had received cash of Rs. 37.5 lacs also the agreement of cash sale was available with department.  Whether penalty under section 269SS will be levied on sale of such rural agricultural land ? Secondly, whether ITR can be filed in response to 148 notice beyond 90 days and can we show in the said ITR the entire receipt (both cash and bank receipts) on sale of rural agriculture land in order to avoid penal consequences u/s 269SS (if any)

read more

i hold tenancy rights to a commercial premise the tenancy is in the name of my partnership firm the entire building is going for re-development due to notice issued by MHADA under clause/rule 79 will my firm be liable to any tax due to conversion of tenancy to ownership of the property ?

read more

Whether online paying of poker games and winning from same be declared as profit & Gains from Business

read more

Tribunal recently on dated 26.06.2023 passed an exparte order on an appeal filed by the revenue and same order  was served around dated 30.07.2023 mentioning the point that on perusal of record we  find that department contention is correct ,whereas in contradiction to the same when we approached ITAT to check the file they refused on the pretext that same is missing ,disappointing by such act of ITAT we   procured the copies of documents of such appeal proceeding under RTI act 2005 ,initially even under RTI application  the documents of file was refused by ITAT by telling by ITAT that the file is missing at their end and information cannot be supplied but subsequently  on further appeal under RTI act ON DATED 20.7.2024  they supplied us the documents of appeal from which we came to know that revenue has sought adjournment by telling to bench in writing vide letter dated 6.6.23 on   hearing date 6.06.2023 when the order was kept reserved , that he did not get the paper book from the AO of this case hence he needs further adjournment but ITAT suo moto passed the order in absence of respondent and seeking adjournment by appellant i.e.,revenue  . MOREOVER REVENUE DID NOT FILE ANY OTHER DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE OR WRITTEN STATEMENT EXCEPT THE SIX LINE OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL . IN FACT THERE WAS NO DOCUMENT ON RECORD FOR PERSUAL EXCEPT THE ORDER OF Ao AND ORDER OF CIT APPEAL . THE REAL FACT RELIED BY ITAT SUOMOTO ARE INCORRECT AND IN CONTRADICTION TO ASSESSMENT RECORDS. WHETHER IT IS THE CASE OF MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD UNDER SECTION 254(2) .Whether the condonation of delay be allowed being the same is delayed beyond six month on the ground of natural justice that the mistake apparent came to our knowledge now only after getting the records under RTI act.

read more

Whether there are any judgements in which it is held that the provisions of section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are not applicable in case of bonafide purchase of property. The difference between SDV and the sale consideration cannot be taxed under 56(2)(x) in case of bonafide purchase.

read more