As held in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (supra) entitlement of assessee of any deduction cannot depend on the treatment accorded to such entries by the assessee. And, existence or absence of entries in the books of accounts is not determinative of such claim, but, that is depended on the provision of law that concerns such deduction.
CIT Vs. V R Textiles (Ahmedabad High Court) – On the ground that the entire undisclosed sales could not be treated as profit of the assessee, relying on the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT v. President Industries Limited, [258 ITR 654 (Guj)], it upheld the findings of the CIT [A] which applies the gross profit ratio against the unaccounted sales for the purpose of making additions on account of undisclosed income. The Tribunal also ratified the decision of the CIT [A] in considering the issue of deployment of minimum capital investment for the purpose of making and rotating the sales outside the books of account. For not having found anything contrary to the findings arrived at by the CIT [A] and on cumulatively examining the facts, which were presented before the Tribunal, it upheld the findings of the CIT [A] which applied the gross profit ration as against the undisclosed sales made by the assessee for the purpose of making the additions. Thus, it could be seen from the order of the Tribunal, on proper appreciation of facts and material on record, it concluded the issue in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. It found sufficient material on record to uphold the findings arrived at by the CIT [A] and for so doing, it had given cogent reasons in its order
CIT Vs. Raghuvir Synthetics Ltd. (Ahmedabad High Court) – Factually, it found huge funds were available without any interest liability with the assessee and that there was no evidence to hold that the borrowed money was utilized for the purpose of advance to the sister concern. All these aspects cumulatively led the Tribunal to hold that the disallowance made only on the ground that advances were given out of the borrowed funds, holding the assessee ineligible for allowance of interest by the Assessing Officer of the sum of Rs.18.66 lacs was not sustainable.
The Assessing Officer supplied reasons he had recorded for reopening the assessment, which read as under:- “The assessee company filed its return of income on 22.12.2006, declaring total income of Rs.1,00,86,370/-. The assessment u/s.143(3) was finalized on 18.06.2008 determining the taxable income of Rs.1,00,86,370/-. It is seen that the assessee company had made payment of Rs.21,60,399/- in Foreign Company for purchase of raw materials. However, neither did the company deduct TDS on this amount nor any certificate obtain from the concerned Assessing Officer for non-deduction of TDS. Prasad Koch Technik Tech Pvt Ltd Vs. Versus ACIT (Ahmedabad High Court)
CIT Vs. Harinder Sachdev (Delhi HC) – A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lunar Diamonds Ltd. [2006] 281 ITR 1 (Del.) has held that service of notice within the time as stipulated in the proviso to Section 143(2) is mandatory. In case service is not effected within the time stipulated in the proviso, this would render the assessment void. The aforesaid decision in the case of Lunar Diamonds Ltd. (supra) has been followed in CIT Vs. Vardhman Estates P. Ltd., [2006] 287 ITR 368 (Del.) and CIT Vs. Bhan Textiles P. Ltd., [2006] 287 ITR 370 (Del.).
Maharashtra VAT Department has displayed List of Suspicious Dealers who has issued false bills without delivery of goods. You can download the list from the following link: Download List of Suspicious Dealers who has issued false bills without delivery of goods in Maharashtra
Debt-ridden Kingfisher Airlines’ promoter Vijay Mallya today called on CBEC chairman SK Goel and sought de-freezing of the carrier’s bank accounts, a senior Finance Ministry official said. Last week, the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) had frozen 10 accounts of Kingfisher Airlines for allegedly defaulting on service tax it has collected from passengers.
In exercise of powers conferred under Section 6A of the Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the Central Government formulated the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995. The Scheme provides pensionary benefits to the members upon superannuation/retirement. In addition, in case of death of member/member pensioner, the pensionary benefits are also given to widow and children/orphan/ nominee/dependent parents as per the provisions contained in the Scheme.
Subject to the provisions contained in section 16, the Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act., 1952 applies to scheduled establishments employing 20 or more persons. The establishments which are not coverable statutorily could be covered on voluntary basis if a majority of the employees and employer are willing. For the purpose of coverage, there is no criterion whether the establishment falls under organized or unorganised sector.
Delhi ITAT ruling on ACIT vs. M/s Global Vantedge – Exclusion of leased telephone lines from fringe benefits. Rs. 26,56,792 expense deleted.
