Mumbai ITAT quashes
revision u/s 263 made by Pr.CIT on the grounds that there was no nexus between
fictitious capital assets purchase & subsequent routing back as share
capital in assessee Group; Notes that Pr.CIT had initiated revisionary
proceedings on 4 grounds – allowance of bogus depreciation for the purpose of
115JB, acceptance of the withdrawal claims for deprecation without referring to
the schedule of assets, non-consideration of addition of bogus share capital
u/s 68 and AO not ordering a special audit/ rejecting the books of accounts;
Notes that AO had consciously not disallowed the depreciation amount from the
computation of book profits u/s. 115JB and had applied his mind in doing so,
also holds that no addition u/s 68 could be made as assessee had explained the
scam entries and all details were available during assessment proceedings
itself; Opines that it was a clearly & legally permissible view that inflow
in the form of bogus capital was related to the fictitious capital purchased
coming from the same source; Also dismisses Pr.CIT’s ground to reject the books
of accounts stating that the addition on account of bogus deprecation withdrawn
would itself come under ‘cloud’ as there would be no case of making further
additions based upon the figures of the same books; Observing that no material
pertaining to introduction of share capital from other sources had been found
in the search or as a result of investigation or on record, ITAT concludes that
there was no reason or any justification on the part of the AO to further make
detailed enquiry for the source of share capital:ITAT
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bombay High Court Clarifies Tax Exemption Eligibility for Venture Capital Funds
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has reaffirmed that a Venture Capital Fund (VCF) registered with SEBI is entitled to claim ...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
Facts Centrica India Offshore Private Limited (CIO), an Indian Company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Centrica Plc, UK Centrica Plc a...
-
The Tax Audit season has started and it’s the time when the Assessees rush to their Chartered Accountants (CA) to get their Tax Audit d...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
-
Facts The taxpayer, a partnership firm, derived income from the business of handling and transport of ship containers, customs clearing a...
-
M/s. Alpha Projects Society P. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In AY 2005-06, the assessee made payments to contractors & for professi...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
F.No.354/66/2011-TRU Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs...
-
M/s. Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam Special Bench) The assessee incurred brokerage expenses of Rs.38....
No comments:
Post a Comment