LTCG exemption is admissible even if the amount is deposited within time permissible u/s 139(4)
LTCG exemption LTCG exemption is admissible even if the amount is deposite within time permissible u/s 139(4) Capital Gain exemption…
IT Judgement
Entire law on the compounding of offences u/s 276C, Explained in – Vikram Singh vs. UOI (Delhi High Court)
income tax judgement Vikram Singh vs. UOI (Delhi High Court) income tax judgement S. 279(2): Entire law on the compounding…
Concealed consideration on sale of Agricultural Land is not Agricultural Income – ITAT
Agricultural Income ACIT vs. Mohinder Singh (ITAT Chandigarh) S. 2(1A)/ 68: An assessee who understates the consideration received for sale…
the levy of penalty is invalid If the AO has not recorded any satisfaction in absolute terms that the assessee has concealed particulars of income.
judgement Indrani Sunil Pillai vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) S. 271(1)(c) penalty: If the AO has not recorded any satisfaction in…
No capital gain exemption on amount not deposited in Capital Gain account scheme prior to due date
CGDAS Humayun Suleman Merchant v. Chief CIT Decision: Against the assessee Capital gains–Deduction under section 54F — Failure to deposit unutilized consideration…
Transfer of shares of a company owning land – Stamp duty valuation not relevant
share transfer ACIT v. Santosh Kumar Garg Decision: In assessee’s favour Capital gains–Applicability of section 50C– Transfer of property through transfer…
Onus is on thr assessee to prove the Creditworthiness of the Donor.
section 68 Pandit Vijay Kant Sharma v. CIT Decision: Against the assessee. Income from undisclosed sources–Addition under section 68 — Gift–Assessee failed…
Under Explanation 7 to s. 271(1)(c), the onus on the assessee is only to show that the ALP is computed in accordance with the scheme of s. 92 C in good faith and due diligence.
judgement Halcrow Consulting India Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi) S. 271(1)(c) Penalty: Under Explanation 7 to s. 271(1)(c), the…
the penalty notice to frame a specific charge cannot be followed in the context of whether the notice should specify ‘concealment’ vs. ‘inaccurate particulars’ because the judgement does not consider SSA’s Emerald Meadows (SC) and is contrary to Samson Perinchery (Bom)
judgement Aditya Chemicals Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi) S. 271(1)(c) Penalty: The law in Maharaj Garage (Bom) that it is…
Penny stock addition deleted by Mumbai ITAT
Penny stock Penny Stock addition deleted by Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO vs. Arvind Kumar Jain HUF (ITAT…
Share application money cannot be treated as unexplained credit if the AO does not make any investigation on the documentary evidences filed by the assessee
judgement judgement ACIT vs. TRN Energy Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi) S. 68 Bogus share capital: Share application money cannot be…
In the absence of any overt act, which disclosed conscious and material suppression, invocation of Explanation 7 to s. 271(1)(c) in a blanket manner could not only be injurious to the assessee
IT Judgements IT Judgements on Pr CIT vs. Verizon India Pvt. Ltd (Delhi High Court) S. 271(1)(c) Penalty: In the…
No restrictions on cash payment of Rs. 20,000/- per day if Taxpayer is offering income @ 8% u/s 44AD
Though section 40A(3) bars payment of Rs. 20,000/- in cash, it may interestingly be note that section 40A(3) is not…
40A(3) is not applicable if taxpayer is opting for presumptive taxation scheme u/s 44AD
Though section 40A(3) bars payment of Rs. 20,000/- in cash, it may interestingly be noted that section 40A(3) is…
Even income taxable under section 68 eligible for exemption u/s 10(23C)(v)
section 68 Asstt. CIT v. Gurudatta Shikshan Sanstha in section 68 Decision: In assessee’s favour. Exemption under section 10(23C)–Allowability– Deemed income under…
Amount disallowed u/s 14A of the Act cannot be added to arrive at book profit for purposes of section 115JB of the Act
it judgement it judgement CIT vs. Bengal Finance & Investments Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court) S. 14A/ 115JB: Amount disallowed…
Concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars are distinct and separate charges.
it judgement Sachin Arora vs. ITO (ITAT Agra) S. 271(1)(c): Concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars are distinct…
Investment in the name of wife eligible for capital gain exemption u/s 54B — Controversy continues…
capital gain exemption s 54B Mahadev Balai vs. ITO (Rajasthan High Court) S. 54B Exemption: The fact that the investment…
