ITAT Half Yearly Digest: January To June 2024 - PART II

Failure To Produce Share Certificate Is No Basis To Doubt Share Purchase Transaction: Mumbai ITAT Refers Art 265 Of ConstitutionCase Title: Shantaben Fathechand Mehta verses Income-tax Officer Referring to Article 265 of the Constitution of India, the Mumbai ITAT remanded the case to the file of AO with direction to verify factual aspects, pertaining to the purchase of the shares in consideration and re-compute the liability accordingly.Trading Income From Sale Of Scrips Can't Be Conferred As 'Unaccounted Income' If Trading Activity Is Not Disputed At Any Time: Ahmedabad ITATCase Title: Shripal Sheshmal Jain HUF verses Income Tax OfficerOn finding that AO as well as the CIT(A) was not right in making/confirming the addition on account of unaccounted business income, the Ahmedabad ITAT deleted the addition made by AO under the Income Tax Act, 1961.If Period Of Holding Of Plant & Machinery Is More Than 36 Months, it Qualifies As Long-Term Capital Asset As Per Sec 2(42A): Ahmedabad ITATCase Title: DCIT verses M/s Claris Lifesciences LimitedThe Ahmedabad ITAT ruled that when the period of holding of the plant and machinery is more than 36 months, then the same has to be treated as long-term capital asset in pursuant to the provisions of section 2(42A) of the Income tax Act.Deeming Provisions Of Sec 2(22)(E) Gets Attracted To Beneficial Shareholder Only Who Has Controlling Interest: Kolkata ITATCase Title: Apeejay Surrendra Management Services Pvt Ltd. verses DCIT Since the income accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise in the hands of KSWPL and not in the hands of the assessee, the Kolkata ITAT held that by invoking second limb of section 2(22)(e) of the Income tax Act, accrual of income and its taxability cannot be held to be in the hands of the assessee.Ahmedabad ITAT Quashes Sec 263 Order Absent Twin Conditions For Exercise Of Power Under Said ProvisionCase Title: Soham Buildcon verses PCITOn finding that there is no prejudice against the Revenue and the twin conditions to exercise the power u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have not been satisfied, the Ahmedabad ITAT set aside the order of PCIT to assess the assessee's case freshly.AO Can't Apply Sec 69 R/w/S 115BBE To Surrendered Business Income Of Assessee Which Was Duly Offered In I-T Return: Chandigarh ITATCase Title: Aniljit Singh Arora verses DCITFinding that the nature and source of unaccounted investment in the hospital building is arising out of assessee's professional receipts, the Chandigarh ITAT ruled that there was no justifiable basis on the part of the AO in applying the provisions of Section 69 r/w Section 115BBE of the Income tax Act to the surrendered business income of the assessee which has been duly offered in the return of income.Kolkata ITAT Deletes Addition Made By AO Upon Capital Gains By Adopting Value Of Property As Per DVO's ReportCase Title: Sri Arijit Chakraborty verses ITOUpon not finding justification on the part of the Income Tax Authorities in computing the capital gains by adopting the sale value as per the value estimated by the Departmental Valuation Officer, theKolkata ITAT deleted the addition made by the AO in respect of capital gains by adopting the value of the property as per the DVO report.Mere Dismissal Of Appeal For Want Of Prosecution Is Not In Accordance With Mandate Of Sec 250(6): Kolkata ITATCase Title: Aryavrat Vintrade Pvt Ltd verses ITO Since the AO as well as the CIT(A) has not examined the issue with the angle of section 69, rather they took the conditions of section 68 where unexplained cash credit is required to be explained by the assessee and applied on the issue of investment, the Kolkata ITAT remanded the matter for re-adjudication.Prima Facie Adjustment Made By CPC Towards Deduction U/s 80P Prior To Apr 01, 2021 Is Beyond Its Jurisdiction: Kolkata ITATCase Title: Bisharpara Kodalia Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. verses ITOThe Kolkata ITAT ruled that section 80AC of the Income tax Act puts a bar against claiming of deduction in respect of certain income provided under the head (C) of Chapter VIA which includes section 80P of the Act also if the return of income are not filed before the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act.Rule 11UA(2)(A) R/w Explanation (A) To Sec 56(2)(Viib) Does Not Require Valuation Report For Substantiation Under NAV Method: Delhi ITATCase Title: DCIT verses Continental Corrugators Pvt. Ltd. Finding that the book value of assets and liabilities adopted for the purposes of NAV method of valuation is in consonance with last audited balance-sheet items, the Delhi ITAT clarified that the AO has misdirected himself on seeking valuation report which requirement do not emanate from the law codified in this regard.Taxpayer Possessing Tax Residency Certificate & Offering Taxes On Income In Other Contracting State, Deserves Treaty Benefit U/s 90: Kolkata ITATCase Title: Debarghya Chattopadhaya verses DCITFinding that the Appellant/ Assessee has valid Tax Residency...

ITAT Half Yearly Digest: January To June 2024 - PART II

Mariya Paliwala

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

ITAT Half Yearly Digest: January To June 2024 - PART II

Mariya Paliwala

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers