ITAT
PCIT Cannot Enlarge Scope Of Limited Scrutiny By Invoking Sec 263: Chennai ITAT
Finding that the case of assessee was selected for limited scrutiny by the AO, the Chennai ITAT ruled that the PCIT cannot enlarge the scope of limited scrutiny u/s 263 of the Income tax Act.The Bench of V. Durga Rao (Judicial Member) and Manjunatha, G. (Accountant Member) observed that “it is not a fit case to invoke the provisions of section 263 of the Act and pass revision order, where the case of the assessee was picked up for limited scrutiny”. (Para 8)As per the brief facts of the case,...
Only Profit Element On Non-Genuine Purchases Merits To Be Disallowed And Not Entire Purchases: Mumbai ITAT
Referring to the decision of Bombay High Court in case of PCIT vs. Ram Builders (454 ITR 444), the Mumbai ITAT reiterated where assessee was involved in execution of civil works and it had shown purchases from twelve parties even if assessee failed to produce said parties for verification, then AO could not have treated entire purchases as non-genuine purchases but only profit element on such purchases.The Bench of Amit Shukla (Judicial Member) and Amarjit Singh (Accountant Member) observed that...
Date Of Satisfaction Note Is To Be Reckoned As Date Of Handing Over Material, For Initiation Of Proceedings U/s 153C: Delhi ITAT
Finding that the assessment year 2008-09 is beyond the period of six assessment years and respectfully following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court and the coordinate bench, the New Delhi ITAT held that the assessment made u/s 153C of Income tax Act for the AY 2008-09 is barred by limitation.The Bench of Challa Nagendra Prasad (Judicial Member) and Dr. BRR Kumar (Accountant Member) observed that “in the absence of mentioning the date of handing over of the materials the date of...
Jurisdiction To Levy Fee U/s 234E While Processing TDS Returns Is Prospective In Nature And Excludes Period Prior To June 01, 2015: Chandigarh ITAT
Pointing that though there has been a delay in filing TDS returns, however, the TDS return has been filed much before 1.6.2015 and none of the cases involved a case of continuing default where the assessee has defaulted in furnishing the TDS statement even after 01.06.2015, the Chandigarh ITAT ruled that there is no basis for levy of fees u/s 234E of Income tax Act, 1961.The Bench of Aakash Deep Jain (Vice President) and Vikram Singh Yadav (Accountant Member) observed that “even though the AO...
AO Lacks Jurisdiction To Frame Assessment U/s 153C/143(3) In Absence Of Valid Satisfaction Note: Mumbai ITAT
On finding that the AO have not recorded valid satisfaction note in the case of the “other person”/assessee in the case as required by section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Mumbai ITAT held that the AO lacked jurisdiction to frame assessment u/s 153C/143(3) and therefore assessment framed by AO are held to be without jurisdiction and therefore quashed.The Bench of the ITAT comprising of Aby T. Varkey (Judicial Member) and S Rifuar Rahman (Accountant Member) observed that, “AO has simply...
Once ITO Accepted Income Earned Which Is Totally Based Upon Depreciation Plus 15% Markup, There Is No Reason To Deny Cost: Delhi ITAT
Finding that the assessee had arrangement with its AE for billing cost plus 15%, which has been duly billed during the year and entire depreciation cost plus 15% has been billed to the AE, the New Delhi ITAT allowed the depreciation claimed by assessee.The Bench of Shamim Yahya (Accountant Member) and Challa Nagendra Prasad (Judicial Member) observed that “When the Revenue is accepting the revenue earned which is totally based upon depreciation plus 15% markup, there is no reason to deny the...
Advance Filing Of Form 10B Along With I-T Return Is Not Mandatory Requirement For Claiming Exemption U/s 11 & 12: Ahmedabad ITAT
Referring to the decision in case of Association of Indian Panel board Manufacturer v Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [2023] 157 taxmann.com 550 (Gujarat), the Ahmedabad ITAT reiterated that filing of Form 10B along with the return of income is only a procedural requirement and cannot be treated as mandatory requirement for the purpose of claiming exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Income tax Act and even if filed at a later stage the assessee is entitled to exemption claimed.The Bench of...
Even If Organisation Is Not Entitled To Benefit U/s 11, It Is Entitled To Claim Expenses Incurred During Year Against Gross Receipts: Kolkata ITAT
On perusal of the audited balance sheet and profit and loss account, the Kolkata ITAT opined that if the assessee is given deduction of expenditure incurred during the year, which it is entitled to, then there will be a net loss against gross receipts during the year, which interalia included receipt of membership and donation from members.The Bench of Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member) and Anikesh Banerjee (Judicial Member) observed that “even if an organisation, is not entitled to benefit...
Ahmedabad ITAT Quashes Reopening In Absence Of Tangible Material With AO To Form Reason To Believe Escaped Assessment
The Ahmedabad ITAT quashed reopening proceedings finding that there was no tangible material available with the AO to form a reason to believe that the income of assessee has escaped assessment.The Bench of Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member) and Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member) observed that “simply that Shri Prakash bhai Ishwar bhai Changela and the assessee are maintaining the bank account in the Social Co-operative cannot be a ground to draw a conclusion that the assessee is engaged in the...
Taxpayer Failed To Duly Substantiate Question Of Identity & Source Of Fund: Kolkata ITAT Remits Matter For Re-adjudication
Finding that the issue in question has been agitated for the first time before the Bench and the same has been covered by a previous decision under homogenous facts, the Kolkata ITAT remitted back the matter to the file of AO for further adjudication de-novo both in legal as well as factual aspect of the assessee.Referring to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. [2013] 357 ITR 330 (Delhi), the Bench of Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member) and Anikesh...
Additions Based On Altogether Different Issue On Which No Reasons Were Recorded, Dents Proceedings U/s 147 / 148: Mumbai ITAT
On finding that addition which is not based on the reasons for reopening is un-sustainable, the Mumbai ITAT deleted the addition made by AO u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.The Bench of the ITAT comprising of Narender Kumar Choudhry (Judicial Member) and Padmavathy S. (Accountant Member) observed that, “the return of income was assessed under section 143(3) of the Act and the additions made by the Assessing Officer and affirmed by the Ld. Commissioner, in fact, are based on the different...
AO Must Follow Mandate Of Sec 50C If Values Adopted By Stamp Value Authorities Exceeds FMV Of Property: Mumbai ITAT
On finding that AO has not computed capital gains by adopting the stamp duty value, the Mumbai ITAT restored the matter back to the file of the AO to follow the mandate of provision u/s 50(C)(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and decide the issue afresh after giving the assessee an adequate opportunity of hearing.The Bench of the ITAT comprising of Prashant Maharishi (Judicial Member) and Sandeep Singh Karhail (Accountant Member) observed that, “According to the provision under section 50(C)(2),...