Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Archive: 14 August 2011

Posts in 14 August 2011

Webinar on Critical Issues in Faceless Assessments under Income Tax Act, 1961

February 14, 2025 2577 Views 0 comment Print

Join our webinar on Faceless Tax Assessments under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn concepts, challenges, and solutions from expert CA Hari Agarwal, FCA.

When Revenue detects unexplained expenditure in the name of doctors of the hospital, Sec 69C additions in the hand of the hospital can be made only after doctors deny receiving such payments

August 14, 2011 865 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs M/s Lakshmi Hospital (High Court Of Kerala At Ernakulum)- In this case also assessee conceded that the unaccounted receipts were collected for payment to doctors attending to patients in the hospital. What we notice is that the department has not made any effort to confront the doctors with the unaccounted payments stated to have been made to them by the hospital which engaged them.

Submitting inaccurate claim would not amount to giving inaccurate particulars, Penalty can not be imposed U/s. 271(1)(c)

August 14, 2011 1494 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs Brahmaputra Consortium Ltd (Delhi High Court)- When the assessee accepts the excess depreciation claimed inadvertently and the same being disallowed by the AO, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is not warranted in such a case.

A.O. cannot issue notice U/s. 148 on the basis of scanty and vague information and material which do not indicate escapement of income

August 14, 2011 6534 Views 0 comment Print

Signature Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)- When the reason recorded for initiation of reassessment proceedings and the information received is extremely scanty and vague, and the material based on which the proceedings are initiated does not indicate escapement of income, the AO will have no jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148.

Process of lifting water is incidental to manufacture ; Supreme Court decision prevails over Board Circular – SC

August 14, 2011 1600 Views 0 comment Print

Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Vs Gurukripa Resins Private Limited (Supreme Court of India)- Central Excise- manufacture- Rosin and Turpentine- process of lifting water is incidental to manufacture; the operation of lifting of the water from the well to the higher levels, is so integrally connected with the manufacture of “Turpentine Oil” and “Rosin”, that without this activity it is impossible to manufacture the said goods and therefore, the processing of the said raw material in or in relation to manufacture of the said final goods is carried on with the aid of power.

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
February 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728