Judiciary

Assessment cannot be reopened on expiry of period of limitation prescribed u/s 149(2)

Shri Narayandas Tolani, Prop. Vs ITO (ITAT Indore)

Plain language of sub-section (2) of Section 150 clearly restricts the application of sub-section (1) of Section 150 to enable the authorities to reopen the assessments which have not already become final on the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed u/s 149(2) of the Act....

Read More

Assessment of Individual cannot be done by issuing notice on HUF

Shri. Deen Dayal Kothari Vs Income Tax Officer, (ITAT Chennai)

An 'individual' and an 'HUF' are different persons under the Income Tax Act, and notice to one cannot be deemed as notice to the other....

Read More

No Work No Pay- Even for the period of termination: Bombay HC

Mohan Moreshwar Agashe Vs Managing Director (Bombay High Court)

By this Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner inter alia prays for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus calling for the record and files in respect of the service of the Petitioner from the office of the Respondents and after perusal of the same to declare the letters dated 30th October, 2012...

Read More

Frivolous, Groundless Filings Serious Menace to Justice Administration

Dnyandeo Sabaji Naik ans ANR Vs Mrs. Pradnya Prakash Khadekar and ORS (Supreme Court of India)

Courts across the legal system - this Court not being an exception – are choked with litigation. Frivolous and groundless filings constitute a serious menace to the administration of justice. They consume time and clog the Productive resources which should be deployed in the handling of genuine causes are dissipated in attending to case...

Read More

Income from Subletting of Property is House Property Income

Akola Trading Company P. Ltd. v/s ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

Amount received by the assessee on account of subletting the property is only income from house property and has to be treated as such. In such circumstances there is no justification of allowing expenses against the house property income other than that provided as deduction under the scheme of computation of house property income....

Read More

Contribution to unrecognized Provident fund not eligible for deduction U/s. 80C

M/s. Kodakkad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs The Income Tax Officer (TDS) (ITAT Cochin)

Admittedly, the contributions of the assessees to the Provident Fund are not a recognized Fund, the same are not eligible for deduction u/s. 80C (2) (vi) of the I.T. Act. ...

Read More

Notional rent on security deposit cannot be considered to calculate annual value

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court)

Assessing Officer to delete the 12% interest charged by him, on the interest free deposit received by the assessee, to determine the ALV of the rented property ignoring the well settled judicial principle that what is important is the real nature of transactions in the relied on case supra and not the facts?...

Read More

Under RTI PIO not supposed to create info that is not part of record

Mr. Subrata Guha Ray Vs. CPIO (Central Information Commission)

Commission observed that under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided. The PIO is not supposed to create information that is not a part of the record. He is also not required to interpret informatio...

Read More

Exclusion of comparables based on Turnover and size filter is valid

M/s. Logitech Engineering & Design India P. Ltd, (erstwhile M/s. Lifesize Communication P. Ltd) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (ITAT Bengaluru)

Bombay High Court decision upheld the DRP order in excluding 6 companies, from the list of comparables chosen by the TPO, on the basis of turnover and size. Following it , we uphold the DRP order in excluding the above 6 companies, from the list of comparables chosen by the TPO, on the basis of turnover and size. ...

Read More

A person other than member or creditor can also challenge Company Name striking off

Rishima SA Investments LLC Vs Registrar of Companies, West Bengal & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)

Is a person, not being a member or a creditor or the company itself, entitled to challenge the striking off of the name of the company under Section 560 of the Companies Act, 1956? Does the petitioner have the locus standi to file and maintain the present writ petition?...

Read More
Page 30 of 950« First...1020...2829303132...405060...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,354)
Company Law (3,238)
Custom Duty (6,410)
DGFT (3,340)
Excise Duty (3,989)
Fema / RBI (3,152)
Finance (3,316)
Income Tax (24,362)
SEBI (2,658)
Service Tax (3,261)

Search Posts by Date

April 2017
M T W T F S S
« Mar    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930