Income Tax Judgements

The grounds raised in the appeal read as under:- “i) On the facts in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law by deleting the addition of ` 70,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of sh

This is the appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.9.2011 of CIT(A)-XVII, New Delhi pertaining to A.Y. 2008-09. However at the time of hearing no one was present on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application was placed be

Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee an individual derives income from house property, business income, long term and short term capital gain and other sources, filed return declaring total income at Rs.86,78,840/-. During the cours

Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as the Act) vide order dated 30.12.2004, determining income of ``28,28,40,870/-.Subsequently, after r

The brief facts of the above issue are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO from the capital accounts of the partners observed that a sum of Rs.5,27,500/- was introduced by each partner on 15.4.2005 and another sum of Rs.2,500/- w

Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is an Insurance Agent. The return of income was filed showing an income of Rs.49,56,545/- consisting income from insurance commissions, house property, capital gains and income from other sources

Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee an individual derives income from house property, business, capital gains and income from other sources, filed return declaring total income at Rs.5,72,052/-. However, the assessment was complete

In this appeal the Revenue has raised three grounds, wherein ground nos. 2 and 3 are general in nature and do not survive for adjudication. The remaining lone issue raised by the Revenue reads as under: 1) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on fa

This appeal was fixed for hearing on 16.01.2012. However, despite notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor has it moved any application for adjournment. It is, therefore, presumed that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appe

The petitioner is a private limited company. In respect of the assessment year 2004-05 it filed a return of income on 27.10.2004 and the same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.12.2004. Thereafter, on 28.3.2011 the respondent issued