• Welcome to itatonline.org Forum.
 

News:

ITAT issues guidelines for stay of demand.

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - sidd.sancheti

#1
Explanation 2 to section 139(1) clearly specifies the due date for filing return of income in case of persons who is required to furnish report under section 92E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is 30th day of November of the assessment year.

Explanation 2 to section 139(1) reads as under:

"Explanation 2.—In this sub-section, "due date" means,—
(a)  where the assessee other than an assessee referred to in clause (aa)] is—
(i)  a company; or
(ii)  a person (other than a company) whose accounts are required to be audited under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force; or
(iii)  a working partner of a firm whose accounts are required to be audited under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force,
the [30th day of September] of the assessment year;
[(aa) in the case of an assessee [who] is required to furnish a report referred to in section 92E, the 30th day of November of the assessment year;]
(b)  in the case of a person other than a company, referred to in the first proviso to this sub-section, the 31st day of October of the assessment year;
(c)  in the case of any other assessee, the 31st day of July of the assessment year."


#2
Discussion / Re: addition as concealed income
April 20, 2012, 12:57:17 AM
The legal effect of the statement recorded behind the back of the assessee and without furnishing the copy thereof to the assessee or without giving an opportunity of cross-examination, if the addition is made, the same is required to be deleted on the ground of  violation of the principles of natural justice. Guj HC in Laxman S Patel 174 Taxman 206 (Also refer Raj HC in Geetanjali 174 Taxman 440 approving 114 TTJ 697; Adarsheela Towers DHC)
Even if assessee requests for confrontation of back material and AO do not provide so, said
back material will become unreliable and consequential addition will be not tenable at law
(Refer DHC in 172 Taxman 64, SC in 26 ITR 775, SC in 176 ITR 169) DHC in Jindal Vegetable
(6 Nov 2008 in ITA 428 of 2007) and Raj HC in 174 Taxman 440, Guj HC in Laxman Bhai Patel
(22/7/2008 ITR No. 41/1997), SC in 125 ITR 713.