|
Advanced Search Options
Income Tax - Appellate Tribunal - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 85158 Records
More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote and Decision etc.
-
2022 (8) TMI 487
Revision u/s 263 - principles of mutuality - CIT(A) enhanced the assessment by denying the mutuality principles and computed the total income on commercial manner - HELD THAT:- Department accepted the ld. CIT(A)'s finding that the assessee is a mutual association and its receipts from members are exempt on the principles of mutuality. In the Asst Years 2004-05, 2007-08 and 2008-09, AO did not dispute that the assessee is a mutual association. However, it was held that the amounts received by the assessee by way of sponsorship fee of an event conducted for the members and for supply of food to members by an outside caterer was not exempt on the principles of mutuality. Both issues were decided in favour of the assessee by this Tribunal vide its common order dated 21.3.2016 for the Asst Years 2004 05, 2007-08 and 2008-09 vide paragraphs....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 486
Additional depreciation on capitalization of forex loss - Depreciation on the exchange rate fluctuation loss on new Plant and Machinery purchased during the earlier year denied - According to the assessee, loss incurred on foreign fluctuation loss incurred for acquisition of plant & machinery should be capitalized to cost of asset as per provisions of section 43A of the Act, and once loss incurred by the assessee goes to increase W.D.V of new plant & machinery, then, the assessee is entitled for additional depreciation as per provisions of section 32(1)(iia) - HELD THAT:- In this case, the assessee has claimed additional depreciation as per provisions of section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, on capitalized value of forex loss incurred on acquisition of plant & machinery during earlier financial years by taking clue from provisions of....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 485
Exemption u/s 54F - Scope of amendment been brought in Section 54F vide Finance Act, 2014 - Capital gain on transfer of certain capital assets not to be charged in case of investment in residential house - whether the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s 54F in case of investment of capital gains through purchase of residential property outside India or not? - HELD THAT:- We have gone through the amendment brought out by the legislature wherein it was mentioned that with effect from 01.04.2015 for claiming benefit of exemption from payment of capital gain accruing on account of sale of property, the assessee must invest in a residential house in India. Thus, this amendment provides that prior to 01.04.2015 the investment made by assessee in residential property outside India were eligible for exemption under section 54/54F. Substituted ....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 484
Penalty u/s 271 - Defective notice u/s 274 - non striking of irrelevant portions - whether no clear indication about the concealment of the particulars of income, nor there was clear indication for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income? - HELD THAT:- As referring to notice A.O has not striked off the irrelevant part in the notice to specify whether the notice was issued for levying penalty for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. It is clear that the notice did not indicate whether there was concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income. The A.O has mentioned both limbs of Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act i.e concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income in the notice. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case ....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 483
Validity of search proceedings - Treatment of jewellery found in locker as the stock in trade of the appellant - As in search of locker the jewellery and ornament worth Rs.70,10,799/- was found - HELD THAT:- The demand raised was on the basis of return of income. The statement recorded under section 132(4) dated 09.11.2012 while giving the answer to question No.18, the assessee has accepted the jewellery worth Rs.28 lakhs that includes stock of business as he was operating the business on small scale basis. The AO did not consider the statement of the assessee and also did not consider the capital gain, balance sheet, ITR and passed assessment order under section 153C read with section 143(3) - CIT(A) did not consider the same because the assessee was not having the place of business and the stock was found as in the locker. It is not a g....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 482
TP adjustment made in pursuance of Section 92BA (i) - specified domestic transactions - HELD THAT:- In the present case there is an adjustment made to the income of the assessee by determining arm’s-length price of specified domestic provisions by invoking the provisions of Section 92BA (i) of the act. The impugned assessment year before us is assessment year 2013 - 14. The above provision i.e. 92BA (i) of the act was inserted by The Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 1/4/2013 and is omitted by The Finance Act , 2017 with effect from 1/4/2017. The issue whether the adjustment can be made to the total income of the assessee by invoking the provisions of Chapter X of The Income Tax Act to the transactions covered by provisions of Section 92BA (i) for assessment year 2013 - 14 till it was omitted. This issue has been dealt with by the ....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 481
TP Adjustment - determination of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) - avabilability of comparable uncontrolled transactions - international transactions of sale of extruders and parts and elements of extruders manufactured by the Assessee to it’s Associated Enterprise (AE) - Whether the profit margins for the purpose of comparison of Assessee’s profit margin with that of the comparables has to be arrived at the entity level as was done by the Assessee or that part of the export sale to AE and non-AE as was done by the TPO or that part of the export sale to AE alone as was canvassed by the Assessee by way of an alternate plea? - HELD THAT:- As we find that there is no dispute in the present case that TNMM is the MAM. Rule 10B(1) (e) of the Rules provides the manner of determination of ALP under TNMM. Rule 10A(d) defines transaction....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 456
Addition being “advances received from customers” and “other liabilities” - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- The matter, is restored to the file of the AO for working the income of the assessee's real estate business in terms of the foregoing. Further, income, we may clarify, is to be considered only to the proportionate extent, inasmuch as only the same could be said to have accrued during the relevant year. The exception may be where the entire money due on a construction has been received from the customers under the agreement, and uniformly so, signifying the passing of the rights to the buyers. The assessee shall in such a case be allowed estimated expenditure on the work yet to be completed. The matter, accordingly, is set aside to the file of the AO for the purpose. AO shall adjudicate taking all....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 455
Bogus purchase of computers - Disallowance of claim for depreciation on computers - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) has taken note of the fact that the entire purchases of computers during the year under consideration were not made by the assessee-company from RIPL and VCPL and in spite of the fact that some of the said purchases were made by the assessee-company from other parties, the AO disallowed the claim of the assessee for depreciation on all the computers purchased by the assessee during the years under consideration which clearly shows non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer as rightly observed by the learned CIT(A). There was substantial increase in the turnover of the assessee-company for the years under consideration including exports as noted by the learned CIT(A) in his impugned order which, in our opinion, was difficult to achi....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 454
Addition u/s 68 - assessee having received share application money and share premium from two investor companies being unexplained - HELD THAT:- Both investor companies had placed on record supporting documentary evidences which duly substantiated their identity and creditworthiness, as well as the genuineness of the transaction in question, which had neither been rebutted by the A.O in the course of the original assessment proceedings; nor in the remand proceedings, therefore, the department without dislodging the primary onus that was duly discharged by the assessee could not have drawn adverse inferences as regards the transactions in question. We find substantial force in the claim of the Ld. AR that now when the A.O i.e. ITO, Ward-11(1), Kolkata while framing the assessment of one of the investor company, viz. M/s. Neel Kamal Vanijya....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 453
Revision u/s 263 - As per CIT cost of improvement is not supported by any material evidences and also that the rental admitted by the Assessee under the head ‘income from house property’ was prima facie on the lower side, keeping in view the locality and the properties let out which would fetch more rental income than admitted - assessment framed by the AO is a ‘limited scrutiny’ case for verification of the deduction from the capital gains claimed by the Assessee - HELD THAT:- As the limited scrutiny was for the purpose of examining the claim of deduction from the capital gains and no other issue was there. Hence, we are of the view that this issue now cannot be examined while proceeding u/s.263 of the Act making revision to the assessment order. Hence, the scrutiny assessment is only for a limited issue, that was....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 452
Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - claim of deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and not found to be correct - HELD THAT:- Respectfully following the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in RELIANCE PETROPRODUCTS PVT. LTD. [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT]wherein, it was held that making an incorrect claim in law cannot tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co. Ltd. [2014 (3) TMI 774 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] wherein, it was held that mere making of a claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, would not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee and that such a claim made in the return cannot amount to furnishing i....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 451
Unexplained money u/s.69A - CIT-A treating the net cash transactions as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act and not treating it as business income - HELD THAT:- We noted that the assessee neither before AO nor before CIT(A) filed any evidence in regard to prove the source of this cash, even the transactions of the alleged transactions of late Shri Subbarao. The assessee could not file even one evidence in regard to this except a bald statement made in the statement of facts, grounds of appeal before AO or before CIT(A). The assessee admitted the bank account maintained with ICICI bank and where this cash deposit made. Once the assessee is unable to prove the cash deposits, we have no alternative except to confirm the addition. Accordingly, in these two years, there is no reason to delete the addition and hence, we confirm the order of CIT(A) and dismiss the appeals of assessee.
-
2022 (8) TMI 450
Weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) - Quantum of deduction u/s 35(2AB) - difference arose because of the fact that DSIR grant approval for revenue expenditure only from 28.01.2014 whereas the assessee claimed expenditure incurred throughout the financial year - whether AO could grant higher deduction ignoring the certificate issued by competent authority? - HELD THAT: - We find that Ld. CIT(A) has sought distinction in the case law of Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT Vs Wheels India Limited[2010 (11) TMI 42 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], However, after studying this case law, we find that the analogy of this case law would be applicable to the facts of the present case. The facts in case law of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT V/s Claris Life sciences Ltd.[2008 (8) TMI 579 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] were quite identical wherein it was noted tha....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 449
Admission of additional evidence by CIT-A - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that during assessment proceedings, effective hearing commenced on 04/03/2013 for which the assessee filed replies on 21/03/2013 to the Assessing Officer. It is also not in dispute that the Assessing Officer did not provide any further opportunity, and completed the assessment on 28/03/2013. There is nothing on record to show that AO expressed any further requirements on or after aforesaid 21/03/2013 to the assessee requiring the assessee to support its claim by further evidence/materials. We are of the view that the additional evidences filed by the assessee in the office of Ld. CIT(A) deserved to be admitted by Ld. CIT(A). Both sides were also in agreement at the time of hearing before us, that the Ld. CIT(A) may be directed to admit additional evidences alread....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 448
Addition on account of peak credit - undisclosed capital in the bank accounts of the assessee - CIT(A) allowed Rs. 6,00,000/- as genuine capital arises from past accumulated savings of assessee and remaining Rs. 10,00,028/- confirmed as undisclosed capital of the assessee - HELD THAT:- As we do not see any reasons to disagree with the ld. CIT(A)’s findings where the ld. CIT(A) regarding addition made by AO of Rs. 16,00,028/- on account of peak credit being undisclosed capital in bank a/c’s of the assessee where the ld. CIT(A) viewed that sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- as genuine capital i.e. out of accumulated past savings and remaining amount of Rs. 10,00,028/- was confirmed as undisclosed capital i.e. total addition of Rs. 16,00,028/- - Rs. 6,00,000/- = Rs. 10,00,028/- as undisclosed capital and it was a reasonable order passed under the provisions of law and accordingly we sustained the order passed by the CIT(A). Appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
-
2022 (8) TMI 447
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Addition u/s 68 - investigation wing has identified the penultimate bank accounts maintained in the Central Bank of India through which it reached the beneficiary account. One such account with the Central Bank of India belongs to MCPL and the beneficiary being the assessee company - HELD THAT:- We observe from the record that assessee has placed purchase order with MCPL for purchase of Automation PLC and the quoted price of ₹.10.80 crores. As per the terms of the purchase order assessee has to make an advance payment of ₹.10.8 crores which was made promptly. It is brought to our notice the party was not able to deliver the material within the stipulated time and accordingly, assessee has cancelled the purchase order and demanded back the advance money paid in Financial Year 2007-08. MCPL had ....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 446
Addition u/s 68 - Unexplained share application money - onus to prove - only grievance of the revenue that the assessee has accepted the amount in cash and the director of the company did not submit the clear reason as to why the share application money has been received in cash when the bank account transaction is possible in all most all the share application subscribers - HELD THAT:- In this case assessee has filed to sufficient details to prove satisfactorily the source of cash received the assessing Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an income nature and it is not necessary for him to locate their exact source. As the Supreme Court laid down in Kalekhan Mohammed Hanif [1963 (2) TMI 33 - SUPREME COURT] the onus is on the assessee to explain the nature and source of cash credits, whether they stand in th....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 445
Deduction u/s. 54F - Claim denied by the CIT(A) as the flats were purchased in the name of appellant’s wife and son - whether the sale consideration received by a person from sale of capital asset if applied in the name of his wife or son for purchasing/constructing residential house whether the assessee can claim deduction u/s. 54F or 54 of the Act? - HELD THAT:- We observe that the assessee has filed registered sale deed dt. 17-10- 2015 for purchase of a building comprising of ground floor three flats and the purchaser(s) mentioned in this sale deed are Sri Mukkamala Srihari Rao(Self), Smt. Mukkmala Jhancy Lakshmi (Wife) and Sri Mukkamala Amar Rao (Son). As per said sale deed Flat No. 102 is registered under the name of assessee(self) and remaining two flats in the name of son and wife. As in the case of Bhagwan Swroop Pathak [202....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 444
Rejection of book result u/s 145(3) - estimation of income - HELD THAT:- As in the hands of the assessee being the partnership firm the interest/remuneration to the partners are the eligible expenses. Same is the case with the depreciation claimed by the assessee. It is also an admitted fact that the remuneration/interest to the partners though eligible for deduction from the income of the partnership firm but the same is taxable in the hands of the partners in their individual capacity. But, we have to see profit of the assessee which is the partnership firm before us. It is the onus upon the assessee to justify based on the documentary evidence that the profit declared by it, is correct and supported by the books of accounts and the corroborative evidences. But the assessee has not filed the books of accounts along with the supporting c....... + More
........
|
