Loading ITAT cases…
517 orders · Page 11 of 11
The Tribunal held that the issue of disallowance of interest income under Section 80P(2)(d) is covered in favour of the assessee by the Supreme Court decisions in Citizen Cooperative Society Ltd. and The Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Ors.
The Tribunal held that when sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance for bogus purchases is not justified. It modified the disallowance to 12.5% of the bogus purchases, reduced by the gross profit rate already declared by the assessee to avoid double jeopardy.
The Tribunal held that the appeal should be remanded back to the AO to ascertain whether the sale of the restaurant business by the assessee was made at market price or below market price. This was agreed upon by both the revenue and the assessee's representative.
The Tribunal held that Section 80P is a benevolent provision and should be interpreted liberally in favor of the assessee. Following Supreme Court decisions, it ruled that Section 80P(4) specifically excludes only cooperative banks licensed by the RBI, and not other cooperative societies earning interest.
The Tribunal held that the issue of disallowance of interest income under Section 80P(2)(d) is covered in favour of the assessee by the Supreme Court decisions in Citizen Cooperative Society Ltd. and The Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Ors.
The Tribunal held that the cost of shares cannot be added as an unexplained credit under Section 68 as there was no requirement for the assessee to explain the source of purchase. The addition was therefore not legally tenable.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to sustain a 12.5% disallowance on bogus purchases. It reasoned that when sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance is not permissible, but purchases from the grey market warrant some disallowance.
The Tribunal held that the AO had made sufficient inquiries and verified the issues raised by the PCIT. The PCIT's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 was based on a misunderstanding of the facts and evidence on record, as the AO had taken a possible view on the submissions made.
The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is not leviable when additions are made purely on an estimation basis without concrete evidence of concealment. The CIT(A)'s order deleting the penalty was upheld.
The Tribunal held that the deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest earned from a Cooperative Bank is allowable. The Tribunal followed the precedents set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Citizen Cooperative Society Ltd. and The Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd.
The Tribunal held that the authorities below failed to establish why interest received from and paid to family concerns lacked a nexus. The disallowance was based on conjecture and not sustainable in law.
The Tribunal found that the assessee claimed to have provided reconciliation details which were not considered. In the interest of justice, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The ITAT found that the CIT(A) mechanically confirmed the AO's order without verification, despite the assessee's contention that the amount was arrears of interest. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
The Tribunal held that the issue of disallowance of interest income under Section 80P(2)(d) is covered in favour of the assessee by the Supreme Court decisions in Citizen Cooperative Society Ltd. and The Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Ors.
The Tribunal held that the assessee is entitled to depreciation only on the cost of construction of the leased units, not on the proportionate land cost. The CIT(A)'s decision to allow partial depreciation was upheld for AY 2010-11 and directed to be followed for AY 2011-12.
The Tribunal found that the assessee had indeed claimed exemption on the principle of mutuality before the CIT(A), contrary to the assessee's current argument. Since the assessee failed to establish mutuality, the disallowance was upheld.
The Tribunal held that the disallowance of interest income under Section 80P(2)(d) was incorrect. It followed the Supreme Court's decisions in Citizen Cooperative Society Ltd. and The Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Ors., which interpreted Section 80P liberally in favor of cooperative societies.