Here is Portfolio page of Ankur, with all his work

CIT(A) method to arrive at fair market value of plot, held better, ITAT
Dec. 24, 2015
Assessee-Co. sold its factory land. It reported fair market value (FMV) of land at Rs.14.12 cr. on basis of report of reg. valuer &, worked out capital gain. AO valued it 1.7 cr on basis of unused land. CIT(A) rejected assesse's valuation report & calulated FMV 2.78 cr. On appeal ITAT held, CIT(A) had adopted probable method for arriving at FMV of plot & that annual rate of appreciat'n method. His method held better than method adopte...
Amounts held includible in total receipt u/s 44BB for levy of tax at 10% rate.
Dec. 10, 2015
Assessee NR Co. explored & produced in India. It declared its revenues on account of two contracts with 'X' Co. & offered its receipts to tax at rate 10% according to proviso. of Sec. 44BB. AO rejected it & included amounts in total receipt. In light of CIT v. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. [2008] 300 ITR 265, CIT held, both amts. are includible in total receipt provided u/s 44BB for levy of tax at rate of 10%. ITAT upheld it on a...
AO held erroneous in invoking Sec. 43 for determining actual cost in deal.
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee acquired business of EMD at slump price. AO found, assessee enhanced value of assets as WDV of assets shown & disallowed excess depreciation. On appeal, CIT(A) held, there was no question of evading tax liability by assessee even if lower depreciation was granted. On appeal, ITAT upheld order of CIT(A). On appeal, HC upheld CIT(A) & ITAT decision stating that assessee had no income for it to reduce its tax liabilities by way of transfer....
Sec.19 RTI Act more beneficial than Sec.18 to appeal if info denied to person,SC
Nov. 06, 2015
Application filed u/s 6 for obtaining information from SIO relating to magisterial enquiries. On non response complaint u/s 19(8) filed before CIO. Its decision was challenged in writ. HC held u/s 18, Commisioner has no power to direct SIO to furnish information. On appeal SC held, out of two procedure, between Sec.18 & 19, one u/s 19 is more beneficial to person who has been denied access to info. Appellants directed to file appeals u/s 19.-010600
As assessees had insufficient cause, thus delay in filling case was not condoned
Dec. 11, 2015
In search, documents, a/c books & papers seized from office of assessees. AO issued notice u/s 153A for block assessm't proceedings. AO passed assessm't order by making addit'ns. CIT(A) & ITAT upheld AO's order. On appeal HC found, assessees have not shown sufficient cause for condoning delay. Parameters laid down by SC in in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur, Nafar Academy 2013 (5) CTC 547 delay held not to be cond...
Int. income earned on fixed deposits as income from other sources fell u/s 80HHC
Nov. 04, 2015
Assessee imported & sold timber. Assessee had interest income earned on money lent to other parties. AO treated it as 'income from other sources. Assessee alleged it as 'business income. On appeals CIT & Tribunal rejected it. On appeal HC upheld it stating, interest income earned on fixed deposits, treated as income from other sources, hence, it is to be considered in calculation to be done in accordance with clause (baa) of Sec. 80HHC. -010593
No explanation for delay in amending petition, could'nt be condoned, held HC.
Nov. 04, 2015
Writ petition filed by trustees.They expired during proceedings. New trustees took over. They filed application for amendment in petition. Delay took place due to which condonation of delay was sought on ground that AOR informed them that records were not available. HC held, comparing with other entries in register, found that rule in writ petition was not discharged for default. Delay of 32 years was unexplained, thus can't be condoned.
AO order of withdrawl of benefit of investment allowance held incorrect by HC.
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee was granted benefit of investment allowance u/s 32A. Under a scheme industrial units held by assessee were transferred to other companies. AO passed order u/s 32A(5) withdrawing benefit of investment allowance. On appeal CIT(A) allowed it. However, ITAT disallowed holding that scheme of arrangement did not result in 'transfer' u/s 32A(5). On appeal HC upheld ITAT decision holding that there was transfer within meaning of Section 32A(5). ...
Reduction claimed on computing book profits u/s 115JB, at 100 % allowed, SC.
Nov. 06, 2015
Asessee was MAT Co., while computing its book profits u/s 115JB, assessee claimed reduction under clause (iv) of Explanation to Sec. 115JB at 100 % of export profits. AO, allowed only 80% of export profits in terms of Sec. 80HHC(1B). On appeal CIT & Tribunal allowed 100%. On appeal HC held in favor of revenue. On appeal SC held, difference between eligibility & deductibility of profits can not be ascertained purely on basis of...
Non obstante clause in Sec. 80-IA(5) overrides all proviso. held HC.
Dec. 08, 2015
Tribunal held, u/s 80-IA(5), while computing profits from eligible business for allowing deduct'n u/s 80-IB, deduct'n of losses set off against profits from other business was to be taken into considerat'n. On appeal HC held, non obstante clause in Sec. 80-IA(5) overrides all proviso. In absence of non obstante clause & because of non-obstante clause, set off amount against other income of assessee has to be ignored. Tribunal's order was upheld.-...