-
As the petitioner was under a legal disability during the period between 18.06.2001 and 27.10.2006, during the subsistence of winding up order and since the petitioner company was under the control of this court and the official liquidator, I am of the view, this is a fit case for granting partial relief to the petitioner.
Tvl. Sanmac Motor Finance Ltd Vs Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21121 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 234A/B/C
-
Since the issue stands concluded in favour of the assessee there would be no need to continue with the reassessment on that score.
M/S SHIV SHAKTI FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD. Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21120 (SC)
-
As per the copy of the agreement placed on record at page 53, the sellers i.e. assessee and other co-sharers of land and the purchasers namely Zora Singh, Darvesh, Lakshan Mirdha and Barinder belong to the same city i.e. Narwana. As per the said agreement the amount of ₹ 50 lacs was received by the assessee and other co-sharers on 18.12.2010 and an amount of ₹ 50 lacs was agreed to be received on 15.1.2011 and further an amount of ₹ 50 lacs on 15.2.2011.
SHRI RANJIT SINGH VERSUS THE ITO, WARD-1, JIND (HARYANA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21119 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82078&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no dispute that the assessee is an authorised money changer. In our considered opinion, this line of business required availability of cash in huge amount as the persons give dollars to be exchanged in Indian currency. Considering the exchange rate, the assessee has to carry heavy cash. To this extent, we do not find any quarrel between the assessee and the revenue.
R.G. CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE DY. C.I.T. CIRCLE – 15 (1) , NEW DELHI AND (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21118 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82080&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The assessee held the agricultural land for more than 9 years as investment and this land was situated in rural area more than 17 Km away from Municipal Limit. This land was used for agricultural purpose and considering the location of this land, in near future it cannot be used for non-agricultural purposes. The AO himself has accepted that the land is an agricultural land out of definition of capital assets.
DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. VERSUS M/S MOTISONS BUILDTECH PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21117 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82081&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
When the assessee has produced all the relevant documents as narrated by the ld. CIT(A) in para 5.11 above then onus casted u/s 68 of the Act has been duly discharged by the assessee. Once the assessee has discharged his primary onus then burden is shifted on the AO to bring on record the contrary material or facts to disprove evidence produced by the assessee. The AO except narrating the modus operandi as disclosed by Shri Anand Sharma, has not referred to any documentary evidence or other material to support his view and findings.
THE ITO WARD- 4 (2) JAIPUR VERSUS M/S. SKYWAYS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COMPANY (P) LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21116 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82083&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
The argument that there is no such stipulation in the letter releasing the grant does not lead to the automatic conclusion that the interest is income of the Assessee. It is not the case of the appellant that the books of the Assessee ever revealed the diversion of any interest income. Had that been so something could have been said. The other argument raised by the counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal wrongly invoked Section 10 (23BBA) of the Act and the invocation of that Section completely blind-sided the Tribunal into taking a wrong decision.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, CHANDIGARH. VERSUS M/S PUNJAB POLICE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD.,
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21115 (HC-P&H) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82449&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
There is no dispute on the fact that during the relevant assessment year, the assessee changed the accounting method from project completion to percentage method. It was the result of change of method that certain indirect expenses claimed could not be allowed. The account books of the assessee were found to be duly audited and prepared in accordance with accepted accounting standard.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD VERSUS M/S PIYUSH COLONIZERS LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21114 (HC-P&H) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82450&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Merely supplying components of machinery may not be of any use for the buyer until all those parts are assembled and commissioned.
Voith Paper GmbH Vs DDIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21113 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
The main function of Mandamus is to compel action, It neither creates nor confers power to act. It only commands the exercise of power already existing when it is the duty of the person or authority proceeded against to act.
Dhan Prakash Budhraja Vs Commissioner Income Tax Investigation Lko. & Others
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21112 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
S. 11/ 12AA: The only requirement for granting registration is that the objects of the society should be charitable in nature and activities are genuine (i) A trust may be of a public charitable nature even if the control of the trust property is not vested in the public but is retained by the settlors, (ii) Registration u/s 12A cannot be declined on the ground that the Trust Deed does not contain "dissolution clause". This is totally irrelevant & beyond the scope of enquiry contemplated u/s 12A. of the Act, (iii) Registration cannot be refused for non furnishing of registration with the Registrar of Societies. Registration with the Registrar of Societies is not a precondition for granting registration u/s 12A.
Shri Dhar Sabha Vaishno Devi vs. CIT(E)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21111 (ITAT-AMRITSAR) · Sections 11, 12AA
-
S. 68 Bogus Cash Credits: The expression “any previous year” does not mean all previous years but the previous year in relation to the assessment year concerned. If the cash credits are credited in the FY 2006-07, it cannot be brought to tax in a later AY.
Ivan Singh vs. ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21110 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 68
-
A perusal of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in LG Cables shows that the Hon’ble High Court has dealt with each of the issues raised by the AO in the present case. The existence of PE would not constitute sufficient business connection.
DDIT, CIRCLE-3 (1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI. VERSUS MITSUI & CO. LTD. (VICE-VERSA)
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21109 (ITAT-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82053&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Coming to the facts of the present case, when the fats are not at variance as the assessee has shown the unsold unit as opening stock. The AO was not justified in bringing the unsold flat to bring it under income from house property. The submission of the ld DR that the legislature has already brought the amendment in section 23(5) to bring the unsold unit after a vacancy period of one year is not acceptable to us as the said amendment was brought by Finance Act, 2017 and is applicable from 01.04.2018, thus, the said amendment is not applicable for the year under consideration.
M/S KIRAN PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS VERSUS DY. CIT, CENT. CIR. 5 (4), MUMBAI
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21108 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82055&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
Provision of 269T and 269SS has been enacted in order to prevent the increase in black money and to stop tax evasion. The intention of the legislature was not to cover the bonafide and genuine transaction wherein the AO himself was satisfied and no tax evasion/use of the black money was involved. A genuine transaction made in an emergency, does not attract penalty u/s 271E.
MOHANLAL SOBHAGMAL, C/O- M/S B.M. VYAS & COMPANY, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS VERSUS J.C.I.T., RANGE-2, AJMER.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21107 (ITAT-JAIPUR) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82059&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip
-
In the present case, new facts, material or information have come to the knowledge of the Assessing Officer by way of the report of DIT (Intelligence and Criminal Investigation) with regards to the doubtful source of the investments made into the petitioner companies. At the time of original assessment, the AO was not aware of or in possession of information which could have indicated that the introduction of share capital from outside India has been routed through a doubtful entity.
EXPERION DEVELOPERS PVT LTD. VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21106 (HC-DELHI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82439&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
To claim the benefit of Section 10B an assessee is required to file the returns by the due date prescribed u/s 139. In this case, the last date for filing the return fell on 30.9.2008 and 30.9.2009 respectively. However, the returns were filed by the petitioner belatedly on 7.1.2009 and 20.11.2009. By filing the returns belatedly, the petitioner did not gain anything. On the contrary, the petitioner risked losing the benefit of deduction under Section 10 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
M/S BEACH MINERALS COMPANY PVT. LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21105 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82442&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Even though, the Hon'ble Supreme Court confirmed the acquittal of the first respondent, it has observed that the wife of the first respondent has admitted that she has amassed the wealth by selling cycle rims and leather products without any bill and out of money amassed by her, she had persuaded her husband to deposit the same in various banks. She has also admitted that the recovered seized assets belong to her. Whether she has been prosecuted for the above non-disclosure or not is not brought before this Court.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, THE INCOME – TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI VERSUS K. INBASAGARAN, M/S. SILVER SHOES PVT. LTD.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21104 (HC-MADRAS) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82444&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
-
Rules are enacted to facilitate the assessee and the same should not be used as a tool and techniques to deprive the assesses from their right of hearing.
Sriram Kapur Vs ACIT
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21103 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
-
Where an assessee converts his capital assets into stock-in-trade and starts dealing with them, the taxable profit on the sale must be determined by deducting on sale proceeds and the market value at the time of their conversion into stock-in-trade. The aforesaid principle has neither been taken into account by the AO as well as by the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal.
SMT. DEEPA S. PAI VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-1, UDUPI.
(2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 21102 (HC-KARNATKATA) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=82380&Category=Judgment&CategoryType=Zip
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.