Search was condected in June ,2018.Assessment framed u/s 153 for the A.Y. 2013-14 to 2018-19 and 143(3) for the A.Y.2019-20. In first appeal CIT(A) has given some relief. Assessee filed appeal before the ITAT for the A.Y. 2019-20,2018-19 and 2017-18. The Hon’ble Tribunal declared the search as illegal and unjusified. What will be position for A.Y. 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2017-18. In these Assessment Years assessee has not filed appeal to the ITAT. Whether these assessments u/s 153A will be treated as quashed. Kindly clear the legal position.

read more

Sir, the assessee is a non resident. Her ESOP shares were sold in the financial year 20-21. The tax is paid under the head capital gains (Short term). The quantum of taxable income is Rs.106 Lakhs. She has no other income in India in any of the subsequent years or earlier years. The short term tax rate is 15%. There is a view that AMT is applicable. For that year the AMT rate was 18.5%. Please clarify on the applicability of AMT.

read more

Appellant has given loan of Rs. 30,00,000/- in F.Y. 2008-09 to ABC through banking channels. Just before the debit of Rs. 30,00,000/- there is a credit in the bank A/c on account of repayment of loan received by the Appellant from his debtor which was given two years back through banking channels. Interest on the said amount and TDS thereon is reflected in Form 26AS and shown in ITR. On the basis of search in the case of ABC it was concluded by the Investigation wing that the loan of Rs. 30,00,000/- is accomodation entry. Notice u/s 148 was issued and reassessment was completed making addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- on the ground that assessee failed to prove three ingredients u/s 68 Query As regards reasssessment whether only on the basis of borrowed satisfaction of investigation wing reassessment proceedings are valid? Whether Notice u/s 148 instead of 153C in the case of third person for search prior to 01-04-2021 is valid? Whether addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- on the ground that the assessee failed to prove the three ingrediants of sec 68 in respect of repayment of loan received from the debtor is valid particularly in view of the fact that repayment was received from debtor?

read more

In case of an HUF of 3 persons with one as Karta and the other two as co-parceners, what happens to the HUF when the two co-parceners expire? Can the HUF continue? What is the tax treatment in such a case?

read more

A private limited company sells 26% of its shares to a person who purchases the solar power generated by the company. Can the shares be sold at face value, as the shares will be bought by the sellers on termination of the contract

read more

Assessee is a Trust running school, whose gross receipt falls under Rs. 5cr. For a.y. 23-24 the assessee trust filed it’s ITR u/s 139(4C) belatedly on 30.10.23 and claimed exemption u/s 10(23c)(iiiad). In Schedule IE-4, following details were filled : Annual gross receipt – 50L Amount applied for objective – 48L Balance accumulated – 2L In Part B2 of Part B – TI : exemption amount claimed u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) – 2L Now, the assessee has received adjustment notice u/s 143(1)(a)(ii), which says : “Income due to disallowance of exemption under clauses of Section 10 entered at Sl No. 3 of Schedule OS is less than the difference between “Gross receipts ” in Sl. No. 3 of Schedule IE-4 & exemption claimed in Part B2 of Part B – TI. Hence the amount mentioned at Sl. No. 1(e) ” Income due to disallowance of exemption under clauses of Section 10″ in Schedule OS is recomputed accordingly. Kindly suggest if the return filed by assessee is correct? Whether the exemption amount filled in Part B2 of Part B – TI Also what shall be done further in this case?

read more

Assessing officer has passed the Assessment order U/SEc, 144 of the Act by making an addition of Rs. 5 Cr on account of unproved purchases after getting an approval form the Addl.CIT.  However, the approval granted by Additional CIT U/Sec.153D of the Act does not contain Document Identification Number (DIN) which according to the Assessee is in contravention to CBDT Circular No.19/2019 dated 14.08.2019. Assessee has filed an appeal before CIT and has taken the ground that The assessment order passed U/Sec.144 of the Act is bad in law and void ab intio on ground that the approval granted by Additional CIT U/Sec.153D of the Act does not contain Document Identification Number (DIN) which is in contravention to CBDT Circular No.19/2019 dated 14.08.2019. Whether assessee is correct and whether their any support for this contention of the assessee. Pl guide

read more

Assessee is developers of the real estate and is having unsold units in the projects developed by him. In respect of unsold units completion certificate from the competent authority   has been received in the year 2015-16. Assessing officer has made the addition on account of deemed rent in the hands of assessee in the A.Y. 2018-19 and he has relied upon the provisions of Sec. 23(5) which are applicable for 1.04.2018. Assessee has submitted that Sec. 23(5) is beneficial provision and applicable form 1.04.2018 and therefore two years moratorium period given in the SEc. 23(5) is applicable and therefore no addition can be made on account of deemed rental . Assessee relied upon the Mumbai ITAT decision in the case of Pegasus Properties P Ltd. 193 ITD 514 Whether AO action is legally justified. Pl guide

read more

if a non-resident Indian residing in America transfers money from his own NRO/NRE A/c in India to his own bank A/c in America, whether provisions of TCS will be applicable?

read more

In one of the Assessment Proceedings for the Assessment Year 2018-19, The Faceless Assessment Unit has considered Income from Intraday Trading in Equity and Income from Trading in Futures & options as Short Term Capital Gain. The Assessee has considered Income from Intraday Trading in Equity as Speculative Business Income and Income from Trading in Futures & options as Normal Business Income which in my opinion is correct. Whether the below noted contention of the Assessment Unit is correct? Contention of the Assessment Unit: “Since the assessee is an Employee of a PSU, the Profit from Intraday trading in Equity and Income from Trading in Futures & options is considered as Short Term Capital Gain and hence the same is calculated accordingly”  

read more