Judgements Uploaded By Users In Category: Income-Tax Act
These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it
The Mumbai Tribunal has held that S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects-Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) Projects-CBDT circular-Notification- Claim u/s.80IB (10) would be allowable even the approval was granted before 01/04/2004 and commencement certificate after 01-4-2004-Circulars and notifications cannot override the provisions of the Act.-Notification No. 1/2011 dated 5-1-2011 restricting the eligibility of section 80IB(10) to SRA project on or after 1-4-2004 and… Read More ...
The Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT has held that Hon’ble ITAT noted that the ‘issue as per reasons recorded for reopening’ provided to the assessee and ‘reasons recorded for reopening’ reproduced in the assessment order are different. Few paragraphs quoted in the reasons reproduced in the assessment order was not there in the ‘issues as per reasons recorded for reopening’ provided to the assessee.… Read More ...
The Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT has held that o Adjustment cannot be made in the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. o Intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act gets merged with assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. If assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the… Read More ...
The Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT has held that The word ‘annual’ denotes a period of twelve months. Consequently, in determining the annual average of the monthly averages of investments under Rule 8D(2)(ii), the aggregate must necessarily be divided by the figure of twelve to compute the annual average. The mere fact that the investments existed only for a portion of the year does… Read More ...
The IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH : MUMBAI has held that Ld.CIT(A) was constrained to pass the order ex-parte, since the assessee could not appear before the Ld.CIT(A) for the reasons beyond his control and accordingly prayed that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present his case properly.In the facts of the present case, we find merit in the submissions made by… Read More ...
The Delhi High Court has held that S. 250: Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Delay in disposal-Faceless Appeal-Central Action Plan-Held that the NFAC would endeavour to implement the said remedial measures in all earnest- Writ petition filed seeking time-bound disposal-Direction issued to dispose of appeal within eight weeks. [S.246A, Art.226] The petitioner filed an appeal on 14.10.2022, which remained pending before the Commissioner [CIT(A) for more… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Community development expenditure-Street lights on the road, ambulance for meeting medical emergencies , developing public garden-The concept of business is not static and over a period of time , it would include within its fold the care and concern for the society at large which would result in a good will… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Change of opinion-Internal audit-Failure to dispose of objections-Reopening of assessment based on change of opinion and internal audit objections is without jurisdiction-Notice is quashed. [S. 147, 144B, Art. 226] The petitioner, Crystal Pride Developers, a partnership firm engaged in real estate development, filed its original return for… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Sales tax department-Non genuine supplier-Failure to produce bank statements-The order of the Tribunal estimating the income at 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases is reversed insofar as the purchases from two parties and order of the Assessing Officer making 100% of addition under Section 69C of the Act is affirmed. [S. 133(6),… Read More ...
The Bombay High Court has held that S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Information from Sales-Tax Department-Failure to prove genuineness of purchases- Addition is justified-Order of the Appellate Tribunal holding that only profit estimation at 12.5% can be made is set aside-Order of the Assessing Officer is affirmed. [S. 133(6), 143(3), 144, 147, 148, 260A] The respondent-assessee, Kanak Impex (India) Ltd., engaged in… Read More ...