-
ITAT DELHI on Mar 19, 2020 cancelled the penalty levied as the notice issued by the AO was held as bad in law as it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings had been initiated under i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. ADMAN ADVERTISING vs ACIT
-
What are the consequences when the notice u/s 143(2) served without examining the return filed in compliance of notice.? The answer is given by ITAT DELHI on 20 February, 2020 in the case of Ananya Portfolio (P) Ltd. v. ITO- IT-CASES-203-2020. Assessment quashed.
-
ITAT DELHI on Mar 11, 2020 held in Penny stock- The assessee submitted sufficient documentary evidences before A.O. The A.O. has not brought any adverse material against the assessee so as to make the above additions. The interim order of the SEBI have been revoked against the assessee. The denial of right of cross-examination is a flaw which renders the assessment order a nullity. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram 125 ITR 713 (SC) and Andaman Timber Industries vs., CCE 314 ELT 641.
-
दिल्ली ट्रिब्यूनल ने 28 मार्च 2020 को फैसला दिया है कि धारा 205 के अनुसार अगर करदाता टीडीएस कट जाने का प्रूफ दे देता है तो उस टीडीएस की रिकवरी कर निर्धारण अधिकारी करदाता से इस आधार पर नहीं कर सकता टीडीएस काटने वाले ने के लिए जमा नहीं कराया। धारा 201 के अनुसार आयकर विभाग के पास समुचित अधिकार है जिसने टीडीएस काटा है उस से रिकवरी कर ली जाए
-
Activity of the assessee are primarily motivated with the objective of promoting handloom sector in India and said activity are not for gain or profit of an individual. The executive committee of the Society also consist of all government officials with no motive of profit sharing or personal interest. The member subscription is received by the assessee in proportion of the supply by the agency and the rate decided. The said subscription fee received cannot be equated with the cess or fee against services rendered. The AO is not justified in holding that provision to section 2(15) will be attracted in the case of the assessee and therefore qualifies for exemption under section 11.
-
ITAT DELHI held on Mar 19, 2020 that the notice issued by the AO would be bad in law if it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings had been initiated under i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. M/S GIRI BUILDWELL PVT LTD. vs. ITO
-
On 11th March 2020 ITAT Delhi held that when the books of accounts have been rejected by the Assessing Officer, estimation of profit should be as per the material available on record. where the directors are the employees of the company and receive commission for services rendered to the company as per the resolution passed by the Board, the commission paid to the directors was part of the salary and cannot be considered for the purpose of disallowance u/s 36(1)(ii) of the Act.
-
The issue is restored to the file of the AO as the assessee was not provided adverse material used by the AO while framing assessment.
-
सही पते पर आयकर नोटिस नहीं भेजने पर धारा 271(1)(b) का ऑर्डर रद्द किया गया
-
any addition u/s 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found during course of search.No addition can be made on the basis of papers / information submitted during proceedings. D ART FURNITURE SYSTEMS P. LTD. vs. DCIT