An assessee had not filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 voluntarily under section 139 in spite of having taxable income. The Return of Income was filed only in response to notice under section 148. But the assessee inadvertently escaped Saving Bank Interest and availed deduction under Section 80TTA. The Assessment Unit made assessment under section 147 read with section 144B and added Saving Bank Interest and also allowed deduction under section 80TTA. The Tax demanded under section 156 was duly paid within 30 days but the time limit for application u/s 270AA (Immunity from Imposition of Penalty) has already expired. The Assessment Unit levied Penalty under Section 270A (7) @ 50 % of the Tax Payable on the Total Income assessed considering the same as under reported income. Almost 90 % of the Tax Payable was deducted by the Employer in the form of TDS on salary Income but even then Penalty was levied on the entire Income considering the same as under reported income. Is there any case laws favoring assessee? On what grounds the penalty be waived or reduced?

read more

We are in the verge of partitioning our properties jointly owned under HUF. The Act says, that HUF partition will attract 0.35% Stamp Duty on the highest value of property under partition in HUF. This point is well accepted and agreed by the Registrar. However, Income Tax act says the Joint property when partitioned, will retain its status as HUF property, if received by a male member in the HUF. Hence, in HUF partition, male coparcener beneficiary of the property will be the coparcener HUF and not the coparcener individual. There are several High court and Supreme court judgements for the same. Same of them are: [CIT v. Arun Kumar Jhunjhunwala and Sons (1997) 223 ITR 45 (Gau)] N. V. Narendranath vs Commissioner Of Wealth Tax,Andhra … on 7 March, 1969 Bal Krishna Goyal vs CWD (1996) 218 ITR 671 (MP) Hence, sirs, the clarification required here is, THe Registrar in Surat region is of the opinion that the HUF partition of property will lead to Coparcener on individual capacity whereas as Income Tax say otherwise. Hence, your wise advice and guidance is required on urgent basis for the above said matter.

read more

Development Charges. Can a developer force me to pay development charges.I haven’t taken possession of my flat as O.C. not received by developer

read more

1. Whether Tribunal has power to condone the delay in filling an MA U/sec 254(2) of the Act 2. ⁠whether date of passing order of Tribunal or date of receipt of order is to be consider for calculating period of six month U/Sec 254(2) 3. ⁠whether Supreem court decision passed later on the issue can be ground to file MA, against ITAT order which has allowed appeal by relying then order of jurisdictional HC  available at that time. pl guide

read more

Sir, Is tds under section 194q applicable in case of a buyer whose income is exempt u/s 11?

read more

It is manually

read more

Let me explain by giving Exm.. Let say x ltd sold some goods to Y ltd amounting to INR 4 Lakhs. Y ltds pays 1.50 Lakhs via RTGS and for balance 2.5 Lakhs Y ltd deposit cash amounting to INR 2.5 Lakhs in bank account of Xltd. Now can AO content that, since Section 269ST allows Account payee check, bank draft or other mode via banking channels which does not include cash deposit directly into bank, this transaction is in violation of section 269 ST and can impose penalty on X ltd. Kindly provide your answer along with proper reference of law or case laws.

read more

Any remedy for condonation of delay in filing form 10IE and return after due date. Any case laws available on this issue.

read more

If a person filing ITR under presumtive taxation receives goods & services from registered entity under MSME Act and defaults in making the payment u/s 43B of I.T. Act, 1961 whether legally consequences of default in payment as per Sec 43B will be applicable? Since sections of presumtive taxation starts with “Notwithstanding anything to contrary contained in Sections 28 to 43C…” Section 43B starts with “Not withstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Acr…” My point is provisions of Section 44 comes subsequently to 43B but non obstantive clause in Sec. 43B appears to have wider coverage so as to overide non-obstantive clause under presumtpive taxation. Please give case laws on the issues,if any.

read more

Respected sir Myself Ankalkote Siddheshwar tax consultant from latur Maharashtra wants to convey you where Got immunity form ? Wants to request you kindly provide immunity form format

read more