#itat judgments

[taxgurusandeep]

Sec.24- Interest for acquisition of property allowed despite use in construction

Sec.24- Interest for acquisition of property allowed despite use in construction

Brief of the Case

ITAT Delhi held in the case of Mrs. Samiksha Mahajan & Mrs. Anita Rani vs. ACIT that as per provisions u/s 24, it is crystal clear that deduction is allowable on account of interest paid on the borrowed capital within three years from the end of the financial year in which capital was borrowed. As per the explanation appended to the proviso of the aforesaid section, it is also…

View On WordPress

[taxgurusandeep]

Disallowance of expenses on estimation, not allowed

Disallowance of expenses on estimation, not allowed

Brief of the Case

ITAT Ahmedabad held in the case of ITO vs. M/s Buildcon Engineers that the AO had made disallowance of labour payments on the basis of estimation to the extent of 20% of the expenditure. The AO has not given any basis on which he has based his finding to disallow at 20% of the expenditure on estimate basis. In our considered view, if the payment is bogus, it would be 100%. The…

View On WordPress

[taxgurusandeep]

Purchase cannot be treated Bogus based merely on the basis of statements given before Sales tax department

Purchase cannot be treated Bogus based merely on the basis of statements given before Sales tax department

ITO vs. Deepak Popatlal Gala (ITAT Mumbai), I.T.A. No.5920/Mum/2013, Date of Pronouncement :27.03.2015

Purchase cannot be treated Bogus based merely on the basis of statements given before Sales tax department

The next issue relates to disallowance made out of purchases and assessed u/s 69C of the Act. We heard the parties and perused the The total purchase expenditure claimed by the assessee…

View On WordPress

[taxgurusandeep]

AO can not treat purchase as Bogus merely because Supplier is declared Hawala dealer by Sales tax Department

AO can not treat purchase as Bogus merely because Supplier is declared Hawala dealer by Sales tax Department

Ramesh Kumar & Co vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai), I.T.A. No.2959/Mum/2014,Date of Pronouncement :28.11.2014

In this case AO has made the addition as some of the suppliers of the assessee were declared Hawala dealer by the Sales tax Department. This may be a good reason for making further investigation but the AO did not make any further investigation and merely completed the assessment on suspicion .…

View On WordPress

[taxgurusandeep]

Furnishing of audit report is directory and not mandatory

Furnishing of audit report is directory and not mandatory

DCIT vs. M/s Surya Merchants Ltd. (ITAT Delhi), ITA Nos. 4309 to 4313/Del/2013, Dated- 18.02.2015

The issue in hand relates to allowability of enhanced claim of deduction of Rs.18,43,552/- u/s 80IB of the Act. It is an admitted position that the assessee is eligible for claim of reduction u/s 80IB of the Act, in as much as deduction claimed of Rs.41,83,813/- stand allowed during the original…

View On WordPress

[taxgurusandeep]

S. 68 No Addition if Assessee discharges initial onus casted on him

S. 68 No Addition if Assessee discharges initial onus casted on him

ITO vs.  Parth Mehrotra (ITAT Delhi), I.T.A. No. 3333/Del/2011, Date-18th February, 2015

Assessee had declared an income by filing its return. The said return was selected for scrutiny through CASS on the basis of AIR. Assessment u/s 144 was made, resulting in an addition of Rs. 28,50,000/- as the assessee was found to have failed to explain the source of investment. (more…)

View On WordPress

[taxgurusandeep]

Addition for Deemed Dividend confirmed - Advance against property contention not valid in absence of supporting

Addition for Deemed Dividend confirmed – Advance against property contention not valid in absence of supporting

Sri Sardar Iqbal Singh vs. JCIT (ITAT Hyderabad), ITA No. 349/Hyd/2014, Date of pronouncement- 18-02-2015

Briefly the facts relating to this issue are, during assessment proceeding, AO noticed that assessee is also a director in M/s Euro Construction Pvt. Ltd. and during the year under consideration, assessee has received a total amount of Rs. 45 lakhs on different dates as loan/advance from the…

View On WordPress

[taxgurusandeep]

Section 10A exemption- Approvals given by Directors of STPI is valid

Section 10A exemption- Approvals given by Directors of STPI is valid

Mentor Graphics (Noida) P. Ltd., Vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi), ITA No. 2423/Del/2010, Dated- 18th February, 2015

Assesee claimed deduction of Rs. 1.33 crores under Section 10A of the Act. On being called upon to explain about the eligibility of deduction, the assessee stated that it was entitled to deduction in view of fulfillment of all the requisite conditions as prescribed under Section 10A. (more…)

View On WordPress