• twitter-icon

Search results for: Section 143(3)

Hyderabad ITAT's Order for Smt. Madhu Devi

ITAT Hyderabad: Flat Ownership for at Least Three Years is Needed to Claim LTCG

Without owning flats for at least three years the long-term capital gain could not be claimed, the Hyderabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled. PCIT is been justified in invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the IT (Income Tax) Act. as the taxpayer without holding the 7 flats for three years from […]

Hyderabad ITAT's Order for Smt. Madhu Devi Jain

Hyderabad ITAT: Capital Gain Deduction U/S 54F Not Applicable Without Owning Flats for Atleast 3Yr

The Hyderabad bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that in order to claim a capital gain deduction under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961, it is essential to retain ownership of residential flats for a minimum period of three years. The taxpayer in question is an individual with income […]

Delhi HC's Order for Azure Retreat Pvt Ltd

Delhi HC Permits Travel Expenses as It is Related to Business and Not Personal by Directors

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the directors’ travel expenses were incurred for business purposes of the company. In this case, the bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia observed that there was no evidence presented by the Assessing Officer (AO) to establish that these expenses were of a personal nature. Consequently, […]

Mumbai ITAT’s Order for Virendra Bhavanji

Mumbai ITAT: Right to Sue Damage Comes Under Tax-Exempt Capital Receipt

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that damage related to the right to sue is considered a capital receipt and is not subject to taxation. The bench, comprising Amit Shukla (Judicial Member) and Amarjit Singh (Accountant Member), observed that Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act explicitly outlines […]

Jharkhand HC's Order for Pralay Pal

JH HC: Tax Penalty Order Set Aside Results in Automatic Dismissal of Case U/S 276C(1)

In its recent ruling, the Jharkhand High Court has furled that when a penalty order is overruled, it will be assumed that there was no concealment of income, resulting in the automatic decline of prosecution under Section 276C(1) of the Income Tax Act. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, in his judgment, highlights that based on previous […]

Delhi ITAT's Order for Swar Maya Infotech P. Ltd

ITAT Order to Re-determine as FMS’s Income Eligible for Deductions Under Business Income

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in reclassifying the rental income as business income and unilaterally disallowing income tax deduction without any justification, according to the Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Hence restore the case to the file of the Assessing Officer for redetermination of taxable income under the proper head. […]

Allahabad HC's Order for M/S M.L. Chains

Allahabad HC: INR 10K Penalty on Tax Authority for Cancellation Earlier Order U/S 263

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000 on an Income Tax Department officer for not adhering to the natural justice while terminating the previous Assessment Order and initiating fresh proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner’s assessment was conducted under Section 143(3) of the Income […]

Lucknow ITAT's Order for Shiva Goods Carrier Pvt. Ltd

ITAT: Not Proves Unexplained Cash If Deposited via Company’s Bank Accounts During Notebandi

The cash deposited via bank accounts of companies at the time of the demonetization is not unexplained cash, the Lucknow bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) stated. Under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the taxpayer Shiva Goods Carrier Pvt. Ltd assessment order was passed in which the total income of […]

Mumbai ITAT's Order for M/s Grasim Industries Ltd.

Mumbai ITAT: Interest Subsidy via TUFS Not Liable Under Income Tax

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently ruled that the interest subsidy provided through the Technology Upgradation Fund Scheme is not liable to be taxed as income. According to the bench comprising Kuldip Singh (Judicial Member) and Prashant Maharishi (Accountant Member), even though the interest subsidy received under the technology […]

Follow Us on Google News

Google News

Latest Posts

New Offer for Professionals

Huge Discount on Tax Software

Upto 20% Off
Tax, ROC/MCA, XBRL, Payroll, Online GST

Limited Offer, Hurry

Easy to File Tax/GST Returns

Upto 20% Off on Tax Software

    Select Product*

    Genius Software