- 2021 (4) TMI 543 - ITAT ALLAHABAD
Rectification of mistake - addition on account of depreciation of earlier years charged as per Companies Act in audited accounts written back in the books of Account during the assessment year 2007-08 - HELD THAT:- AO in the first round of litigation has made addition to the income of the assessee to the tune of 15% of the depreciation which led to the additions to the income of the assessee to which stood enhanced to the additions to the income of the assessee to the tune of entire depreciation write back by ld. CIT(A). The tribunal in first round of litigation gave relief to the assessee to the tune of ₹ 43.95 lacs and the assessee being aggrieved filed MA. The tribunal allowed the MA by restoring the issue back to its file for fresh adjudication of ground number 5 & 6. During the course of hearing before tribunal which was co....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 542 - ITAT DELHI
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defective notice u/s 274 - decision of quantum appeal - as per assessee no mention of specific limb of Section 271(1)(c) for which penalty proceedings have been initiated by way of striking off the inappropriate words in penalty notice - HELD THAT:- It is pertinent to note that the assessee company was not in existence when the first search took place on the group of BPTP and the seized material therein clearly does not belong to assessee company. Secondly, at the time of the second search no incriminating material was found in respect of the assessee company. Hence, the addition made on PDC’s based on the first search does not have any corroborative evidence which has been brought by the Revenue on record. The CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer has failed to establish that the assessee company was invol....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 541 - ITAT DELHI
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - notice issued after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year - disallowance u/s 40a(ia) with respect to non-deduction of tax u/s 194H on the discount enjoyed by the distributors on sale of prepaid cards and u/s 194J pertaining to payment of roaming charges to Telecom Service providers - HELD THAT:- It is trite that in order to reopen an assessment made under Section 143 (3) of the Act after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the reasons recorded must allege that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly material facts necessary for its assessment. Such allegation is necessary since it is a condition precedent to the assumption of jurisdiction. In the absence of such allegation, the reassessment proceedings have to be held a....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 540 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Assessment u/s 153C - undisclosed LTCG - whether the document in the form of tally and Balance sheet as found during the course of search belong to the assessee? - HELD THAT:- To our mind, the documents found during the search in the given facts and circumstances, were of the ‘SJSL’ where the transactions for the impugned land were recorded. Thus, these were the documents which were not belonging to the assessee but to M/s SJSL. Hence, in the absence of any document found belonging to the assessee, the proceedings under section 153C of the Act cannot be initiated against the assessee. On perusal of the statement recorded under section 133(4) reproduced by the AO in his order we do not find any remarks made by such director to the effect that material/document seized during the search does not belong to the PS i.e. ‘SJSL&....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 539 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Long Term Capital Gain on sale of Vejalput land - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute qua the amount of capital gain earned by the assessee along with other parties. As per the assessee the amount of capital gain was taxable in the assessment year 2007-08 and 2008-09 whereas the revenue had taxed the entire amount of capital gain in the assessment year 2006-07 as contended by the learned AR. At the time of hearing, as pointed out by the learned AR that the assessee has settled his dispute for the assessment year 2006-07 under VSV scheme 2020. For this purpose, the learned AR has filed form 3 issued by the Income Tax Department showing the settlement of the dispute under VSV scheme 2020. As the dispute relating to the year under consideration has been settled under VSV scheme 2020, we hold that no separate adjudication is required. Share of pr....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 538 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Undisclosed income - Voluntary disclosure of the assessee about the undisclosed income - year of taxability - assessee has made disclosure on his individual capacity and stated that transactions of payment of cash and making such investment was made by him in the financial year 2009-10 relevant to the Asstt.Year 2010-11, and therefore, the assessee had rightly included the said disclosure amount in the return for the Asstt.Year 2010-11, which was as per the statement made under section 132(4) - HELD THAT:- Except voluntary disclosure of the assessee about the undisclosed income, there is nothing with the department to establish that the undisclosed income declared by the assessee pertained to the year 2009-10. CIT(A) recorded a finding that enquires have been conducted in the case of only seven companies, which together contributed a shar....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 537 - ITAT KOLKATA
Validity of reopening of the assessment by issuing notice u/s 148 read with section 147 - eligible reason to believe escapement of income - bogus LTCG/STCL and unsecured loans receipts - A.O noted that the assessee company has no real business activities since there are no purchase and sales found during the relevant F.Y - whether the AO on the basis of whatever material before him, [which he had indicated in his "reasons recorded"] had reasons warrant holding a belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment? - whether the condition precedent necessary to usurp the re-opening jurisdiction can be discerned from perusal of the reasons recorded by the AO in the instant case? - HELD THAT:- As in the reasons recorded had specifically stated that the assessee had received ₹ 25,00,000/- from M/s. DRS Enterprises Pvt........ + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 536 - ITAT CHENNAI
Disallowance of additional depreciation - Scope of amendment to section 32(1)(iia) - depreciation claimed by the assessee relates to assets acquired in the preceding assessment year, wherein the assets were used for less than 180 days and only 10% of depreciation was claimed in earlier year - whether CIT(A) has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee’s claim of additional depreciation by relying on the decision in the case of Brakes India Ltd [2017 (4) TMI 511 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] on the ground that the issue involved relates to the assessment year 2014-15, whereas the amendment to section 32(1)(iia) by Finance Act 2015 came into force only from 01.04.2016 and not retrospectively - HELD THAT:- Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal [2017 (5) TMI 1694 - ITAT CHENNAI], we find no reason to interfere....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 535 - ITAT CHENNAI
Delayed remittance of Provident Fund contribution and ESI - disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) OR u/s 43B - DR has argued that unlike the employers contribution, the employees part of contribution to PF and ESI are not allowable under section 43B of the Act since the said contributions are not paid within the due dates as specified in the respective Acts, and such unpaid employees contributions are liable for disallowance under section 36(1)(va) r.w. section 2(24)(x) - By following the decision of CIT v. Industrial Security & Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd. [2015 (7) TMI 1063 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to allow the actual amount paid before the due date of filing the returns under section 139(1) of the Act - HELD THAT:- As in this case, on perusal of the details of break-up of the PF/ESI contribution remitted on t....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 534 - ITAT CHENNAI
Disallowance of commission paid - specific services the commission agent rendered to the assessee for which the assessee has paid the commission - assessee has failed to submit any documentary evidences to prove the genuineness of claim and actual services rendered by foreign agent - HELD THAT:- Generally no direct evidence for the “service rendered” can be produced and the relationship of the “service rendered” and “business purposes” has to be established by circumstantial evidence and growth in the business of the assessee in such cases. In this case, as per the matching concept of taxation, both the commission Agents have given sufficient business. Foreign Agent has given export orders of ₹.22.Crs and local agent has procured orders for Reliance Jio Info Comm Ltd. for the extent of ₹. 60....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 533 - ITAT MUMBAI
Legality of approval granted by the designated superior authority u/s 153D - approval granted by the superior authority in mechanical manner or not? - contention on behalf of the assessee that approval granted u/s 153D does not meet the requirement of law and hence assessment orders passed in consequence of such non-est approval is a nullity in law - HELD THAT:- The approval granted under section 153D of the Act should necessarily reflect due application of mind and if the same is subjected to judicial scrutiny, it should stand for itself and should be self-defending. There are long line of judicial precedents which provides guidance in applying the law in this regard. At the cost of repetition, it may be reiterated that in the instant case, approving authority did not mention anything in the approval memo towards his/ her process of deri....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 532 - ITAT CHENNAI
Benefit of 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020' - HELD THAT:- An identical application filed by an assessee in the case of M/s. Nannusamy Mohan (HUF) [2020 (11) TMI 484 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] taking note of the fact that some assessee's have already filed declaration in Form No. 1 along with Form No. 2 to the Designated Authority and received Form 3 and some assessee's had already filed Form No. 1 & 2 and awaiting form no. 3 from the designated authority and also the fact that remaining assessee's are willing to file Form No. 1 and 2 within the due date prescribed for this purpose, we dismiss the appeals filed by the assessee's as withdrawn. However, a liberty is given to the assessee's to restore the appeals, in the event of the Designated Authority, for any reason reject the application filed by the assessee under section 4 of the said Act.
- 2021 (4) TMI 531 - ITAT CHENNAI
Benefit of 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020' - some assessee's have filed declaration in Form No. 1 along with undertaking waiving rights for any remedy in Form No. 2 to the designated Authority and has also received Form 3. In some cases, form no 1 and 2 has been filed and awaiting form no. 3 from the designated authority and in some cases, the assessee's have expressed their willingness to file form no. 1 and 2 and settle their dispute under the scheme - HELD THAT:- Once the assessee's intend to file a declaration in Form No. 1 along with undertaking and expressed their willingness to settle pending disputes regarding direct taxes, then there is no point in keeping appeal filed by the assessee's. We, further noted that recently the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Madras has considered an identical applicat....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 530 - ITAT MUMBAI
Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - CIT-A directed disallowance u/r. 8D(2)(iii) amounting to half percent of assessee's investment which earned exempt income - HELD THAT:- No infirmity in the above direction of learned CIT(A). Assessee's claim that this limb of disallowance u/r. 8D(2)(iii) was not invoked by the AO is not at all sustainable. AO had made disallowance under section 14A. CIT(A) had deleted that and directed for a disallowance of 0.5% of the average value of investment under rule 8D(2)(iii) after necessary verification by the Assessing Officer. We find that the disallowance sustained by learned CIT(A) in effect is much less than that by the Assessing Officer. Even if investment have been made out of available interest free fund the same by no stretch of imagination goes on to the prove that no disallowance under rule 8D(....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 529 - ITAT SURAT
Unaccounted income disclosed during the course of survey - survey action conducted u/s 133A on the business premises of assessee wherein incriminating documents were found in possession of partners of assessee firm - statement of one of the partner of assessee firm as recorded on oath disclosed unaccounted income as net income for assessment year (AY) 2012-13 - partner of assessed also furnished the bifurcation of unaccounted income - primary contention of the assessee that the partners of the assessee made statement of gross business receivable, CIT(A) held that while making statement in the survey proceeding the partners specifically stated that the amount is distributed among the partners are unrecorded and unaccounted receivables of the firm - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute that during the survey action on 05.07.2011, the partner of ....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 528 - ITAT INDORE
Allowability of development expenses - A.O observed that the assessee had claimed development expenses on estimated basis which are much higher than the actual expenses incurred during the year - why the assessee has changed the system of claiming development expenses on estimated basis with effect from Assessment Year 2013-14? - HELD THAT:- From perusal of the above observation by Ld. A.O we find that firstly he mentions that development expenses has not yet been incurred in respect of all the plots and then he further observes that actual development expenses actually incurred would have to be considered for deduction but he fails to give the benefit of actual expenses incurred by the assessee during the year and thirdly he applies a complete different approach with regard to the development charges whether received or not but would acc....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 527 - ITAT MUMBAI
Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) - HELD THAT:- As relying on ratio laid down in Reliance Petroproduct (P) Ltd [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] and Ventura Textiles Ltd. [2020 (6) TMI 305 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] is squarely applicable to the instant case wherein held merely because assessee had claimed expenditure, which claim was not accepted or was not acceptable to revenue, that by itself would not attract penalty u/s 271(1)(c). Following the same, we delete the penalty levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.- Decided in favour of assessee.
- 2021 (4) TMI 525 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH
Territorial Jurisdiction - Levy of penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 - import of confectionery items from Dubai - Allegation of under valuation by DRI - error in not relying on th decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in M/S SEVILLE PRODUCTS LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI [2021 (3) TMI 775 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] - appellant is located in Dubai, outside of India and having no office in India - HELD THAT:- It was inquired from the ld. A.R. about the decision of the Larger Bench on this issue by this Tribunal passed in 2021. The ld. A.R. fairly accepted that he is not aware of the decision. It is very unfortunate that the departmental officers appearing before this Court are not updated with the latest judgments of this Tribunal. As there is a decision of the Division Bench of this Tribunal which is against the ....... + More
- 2021 (4) TMI 524 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI
Right of respondent on common road - disturbance or hindrance to the Resolution Professional or to any of his staff or security personnel in any manner caused or not - HELD THAT:- Schedule -1 ‘property details and position’ which is filed in the Reply Affidavit at page 42 that site map has been filed with shows that on the south side of the plot there is a common road, this fact has not been denied by the Appellant. This fact has also been mentioned in the Title Deed, so taking this fact and all the submissions advanced by the parties, the Ld. Adjudicating Authority has rightly pass the impugned order. The proceeding before the Adjudicating Authority and this Tribunal is summary in nature as to follow strict time line. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant have failed to make out any ground and the finding recorded by Ld. Adjudicating Authority - Appeal dismissed.
- 2021 (4) TMI 523 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , MUMBAI BENCH
Liquidation of Corporate Debtor - liquidation sought as no Resolution Plan was receive - Section 33(1) of the IBC 2016 - HELD THAT:- On 02.02.2021 pronouncement of orders was deferred upon request of a prospective Resolution Applicant viz. Mantena Constructions Pvt Ltd, who had filed application expressing its interest in putting up a Resolution Plan and requesting certain details from the RP in furtherance thereof. Orders were passed in permitting the Applicant therein to access the details. The RP was also directed to provide the required information. However, on 23.03.2021 the Applicant (Mantena Constructions Pvt Ltd) submitted that upon verification of the information made available, it was no longer interested in submitting a Resolution Plan. Thereafter, orders in MA No. 227 of 2018 & MA No. 350 of 2018 were reserved and are bein....... + More
