Income Tax Judgements

I have carefully considered the various arguments raised by the appellant and also the material brought on record by the Assessing Officer. On the issue of notice u/s. 143(2), I have called for and examined the case records of the Assessing Officer.

Adverting first to ground no.1 in the appeal, facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return filed on 31.03.2002 by the assessee, a financial services company, was selected for scrutiny with the service of a notice u/s 143(2) of the Income-t

The assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of providing professional services and trading of shares. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed on 31.10.2001 declaring net income of Rs.13,833/-. The reasses

On the observation we find the following fact... The assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of writing instruments. During the relevant assessment year, the assessee has changed the method of valuation of stock. Due to t

We have heard both the parties and gone through the facts of the case. Indisputably, the ld. CIT(A) considered additional material in relation to two comparables and that of the assessee, which was not available before the TPO/AO. Apparently, the ld.

This case was listed for hearing before the Tribunal on 28-2-2012 and for this assessee was informed. Today i.e. on 28-2-2012 when the case was called on board, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has been filed be

Before we part with this order, it may be mentioned that according to the provisions of sub-section (3) to Section 12AA, even after grant of registration, if the Commissioner is satisfied that the activities of such trust or institution are not genui

The facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in establishing, developing and running hotels, holidays and health resorts. During the year under consideration, it had incurred expenditure on account of horticulture to the tune of Rs.

I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the appellant. I have also perused the case laws as relied upon by the appellant. Before considering the appellant’s submission, it is important to look about the operative part of the di

Vide a penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) dated 27-03-2009, it was held that the assessee has concealed the income of Rs.8,16,617/- which was taxed on account of estimation of profit. The First Appellate Authority has expressed that since the addition was i