2015 (10) TMI 1758 - ITAT DELHI
Lakshya Seth Versus Income Tax Officer, New Delhi
Revision u/s 263 - as per CIT(A) AO has allowed benefit of section 44AD/AF erroneously without considering whether conditions thereto are fulfilled, and also not by applying provisions of section 69A of the Act - Held that - AO, after considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, proceeded to estimate the business income of the assessee 8 of gross receipts and made an addition of ₹ 6,11,230/- which was accepted by the.....
2015 (11) TMI 4 - ITAT CHENNAI
M/s. Mydeen Packagings Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward I (2) , Puducherry.
Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - AO observed that the assessee firm had not furnished the audit report U/s.44AB - Held that - Assessing Officer has not heeded to the request of the assessee to while invoking the provisions of Section.44AF of the Act with respect to its actual turnover. It appears that AO had computed 5 of the turnover declared in the return of income or admitted by the assessee whichever is higher. On this issue, considering the facts and.....
2015 (12) TMI 1367 - ITAT MUMBAI
Shri Suharsh R Joshi Versus Income Tax Officer, 21 (2) (4) , Mumbai
Additions of Bank deposits made u/s 68 - applicability of provisions of sec. 44AF - Held that - In view of the fact that the deposits were found to have been made into the bank account from various cities, the theory of unexplained cash credit may not be applicable in view of the explanations furnished by the assessee. Hence, inclined to accept the claim of the assessee that the same represents business receipts. Accordingly, in my view, the prov.....
2015 (6) TMI 648 - ITAT PANAJI
Good Luck Kinetic Versus ITO, Ward-2, Margao
Addition u/s 43B - statutory liabilities which had not been paid by the Assessee before the due date - Applicability of Sec. 43B when the return is filed applying the provisions of Sec. 44AF - Held that - The statutory liability in the present case has not been paid before the due date of filing the return. Further, the non-obstante clause in Sec. 43B has a far wider amplitude because it uses the words notwithstanding anything contained in any ot.....
2015 (3) TMI 647 - ITAT DELHI
Jeewan Chandra Punetha Cloth Merchant Khari Bazar Versus DCIT, Nainital Utrakhand
Suppressed profit - AO in upholding addition that out of the total business activity carried on in the same premises, 50 belonging to the father and son respectively - CIT(Appeal) sustaining addition to the extent of 50 of the business - Held that - One of the contention of the assessee that he is engaged in the business of retail trade, and its total turn over did not exceed the prescribed monetary limit and AO ought to have computed profit 5 of.....
2015 (2) TMI 254 - DELHI HIGH COURT
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-XIII Versus CHANDER PRAKASH PABREJA
Income from undisclosed sources - assessee s entitlement to the benefit of Section 44AF as had voluntarily disclosed receiving Rs. 16,07,240/- during the course of the assessment - assessee urged that the AO made no effort to discern as to the character of the amounts and that some of them at least constituted expenses - Held that - In the present case the assessee had sought the benefit of Section 44AF but the revenue found later that the amount.....
2014 (10) TMI 173 - ITAT LUCKNOW
Income Tax Officer Versus Shri Anokhe Lal, Prop. M/s Suraj Traders
Reassessment - Reasons recorded shows income escaped or not Held that - CIT(A) recorded that the reasons do not show any income chargeable to tax that has escaped assessment and while completing the assessment, no addition for any income escaping assessment has been made - The addition made is in respect of estimation of income by rejecting the books of accounts - once the AO accepts the objection of the assessee and does not assess the income wh.....
2014 (6) TMI 284 - ITAT DELHI
ITO, Ward-34(4), New Delhi Versus Pankaj Sharma Alias Yatinder Sharma
Additions regarding non-furnishing of complete details on account of concealed income Held that - No return of income had been filed by the assessee for the year under consideration, contending that his income for the year under consideration was below the taxable limit - CIT (A) restricted the addition on the basis of the material available on record - after accounting for the cash deposits and the cash withdrawals, the source of the amount of R.....
2014 (4) TMI 699 - ITAT MUMBAI
Smt. Ponidevi P. Choudhary, Gulab Sons Dairy Versus ITO Wd. 22(3) (3), Mumbai
Jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act Validity of order of relooking of the cash deposits Applicability of section 44AF of the Act - Held that - An order cannot be termed as erroneous unless it is not in accordance with law - If an Income-tax Officer acting in accordance with law makes a certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, the order should have been written more elaborately - AO has not applie.....
2014 (2) TMI 562 - ITAT MUMBAI
Shri Bhimraj D. Jain Versus Income Tax Officer 24(1) (3), Mumbai
Estimation of income - applicability of section 44AF - Disallowance for Non-furnishing of authentic vouchers and payments Held that - The AO is of the view that the assessee does not claim the benefit under section 44AF and writes Nil profit in column 33 sub clause (iii) - The assessee has not claimed the benefit of section 44AF in the return filed and also could not furnish the requisite vouchers to authenticate the purchases claimed by the asse.....
2013 (11) TMI 62 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Dilipkumar Vasantlal Thakkar And others Versus ITO Ward 5(1), Surat
Presumptive income u/s 44AF of the Income Tax Act Presumptive income rejected and assessment was done u/s 144 - Assessees are individual and are in retail trading business of sarees and dress materials since many years additions of undisclosed income determined on the basis of highest peak balance on particular date of the two banks maintained by the appellant. - Held that - The assessees claimed that they were in retail business of saree, was no.....
2012 (10) TMI 671 - ITAT, DELHI
Bhupinder Singh Versus Income-tax Officer, Ward 33(4), New Delhi
Ex parte assessment u/s 144 - addition on unexplained cash deposited in his bank account - Held that - The medical certificate dated 12.3.2010 for the period 4.10.2009 to 28.2.2010 mentioned complete bed rest. It is mentioned in the said certificate that the certificate is not valid for medicolegal purpose. In any case, this certificate does not explain the absence on 17.7.2009 as also how could the assessee appear before the AO on 22.10.2009, de.....
2013 (2) TMI 287 - ITAT AGRA
Ashok Kumar Varshney Versus Income-tax Officer, 3(4), Hathras
Penalty u/s. 271-A - non-maintenance of books of account required u/s. 44AA - Held that - The assessee did not maintain any books of account or other documents to show his correct income to support the income declared in the return. The assessee furnished return of income at Rs. 76,620/- which was not filed in accordance with the provisions of section 44AF. Further, the assessee claimed lower profit and gains as against the provisions of section .....
2013 (11) TMI 124 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Shanthi Fire Works Versus Income-tax Officer
Assessment u/s 147 - Held that - The assessee himself has admitted 6 percent income on the sales effected which is more than that provided under section 44AF Assessed the income of the assessee at 6 percent on the sales effected as against 8 percent made by the Assessing Officer Decided in favour of assessee. BR BR Addition of unaccounted purchases Held that - The Assessing Officer has not produced any evidence to indicate that the purchases corr.....
2012 (11) TMI 137 - ITAT CUTTACK
Shri Subhrajee Mallick, Prop. M/s. BPL. Distributors Versus Income-tax Officer, Ward-2, Paradeep.
Retail trade u/s 44AF - Income below the rate of 5 as prescribed u/s 44AF - Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for non-compliance and u/s.271(1)(c) holding a view the addition was the result of submission of inaccurate particulars of income in violation to the provisions of Section 44AF - Held that - CIT(A) can do what the ITO can do and also direct him to do what he has failed to do, as held in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT 1990 (9) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT .....