Join our webinar on July 24-25 for an in-depth analysis of Union Budget 2024. Learn about tax proposals, sector impacts, and investment insights. Register now!
Join CA Sachin Jain for a live course on Input Tax Credit from a litigation perspective. Gain practical insights and master ITC complexities. Register now!
CORRIGENDUM New Delhi, the 23rd March, 2012 In the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 12/2012-Customs, dated the 17th March, 2012 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R. 185 (E), dated the 17th March, 2012, in the Annexure,-
It is undisputed fact that the appellant is an undertaking and is engaged in the manufacturing of article specified in Fourteenth schedule and in a specified category of states for which it is eligible for deduction u/s.80IC. Such an exemption has been allowed in the earlier years by the Assessing 0fficer himself i.e. for the Assessment Year 2005-06 and 2006-07. Sub-section 3 of section 80IC categorically provides that the deduction would be available for 100% of such profits and gains for 10 assessment years if the profits and gains have been derived from such business activities.
We find that it is clear from letter dated 19-12-2009 that assessee has explained the position regarding liabilities in respect of three parties and even confirmation of M/s Surekha Overseas was filed. This reply clearly shows that the liabilities were still outstanding. Therefore, in our opinion, ld. CIT(A) has rightly held that since the liabilities are still outstanding, the provisions of sec.41[1] are not attracted.
On Appeal ITAT held that that the letting out of terrace has to be assessed under the head Income From House Property as against Income From Other Sources assessed by the Assessing Officer and also allow deduction provided under section 24 of the Act.
In regard to jewellery found on person and in the bedroom of Smt. S.H. Khorakiwala, it was stated before the Assessing Officer that the same was received at the time of her marriage. The Assessing Officer accepted the confirmation of mother but the confirmation of NRI gifts from relatives was not accepted. He observed that whether they had purchased the jewellery abroad and gifted to Smt. Samina H. Khorakiwala in which case the customs clearance receipt should have been filed.
We have uploaded Calculator to calculate relief Under section 89(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of Arrears of salary received during the financial year 2011-12. The Calculator will calculate relief if any which Assessee can claim U/s. 89(1) in respect of salary received in Financial Year 2011-12 pertaining to years prior to that. Calculator will calculate the Relief for Arrears received pertaining to the period from from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2010 The Calculator also automatically Fills Form 10E with its annexure and Table A Automatically.
Union Budget 2012-13 could not lift the sentiment of the capital markets in India as the markets do not seem to be influenced or moved by the budget proposals, which are otherwise also not directly in favour of capital market.
2nd CORRIGENDUM New Delhi, the 23rd March, 2012 G.S.R. (E).- In the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 12/2012-Central Excise, dated the 17th March, 2012 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R. 163 (E), dated the 17th […]
In KEC International Ltd. v. B.R. Balakrishnan (2001) 251 ITR 158., the Division Bench emphasised the importance of reasoned orders being passed on the applications for stay. The Assessing Officers consistently refuse to follow the law laid down in the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court. The Assessing Officers and the Appellate Authorities are duty bound to act in accordance with binding precedent and there is no reason or justification to act in the manner in which the applications for stay have been disposed of in this case.
Nishith Madanlal Desai vs. CIT (Bombay High Court) It was held that The power which is vested in the Assessing Officer under Section 220(6) and for that matter that which is conferred upon the CIT (Appeals) to grant a stay of demand is a judicial power. It is necessary for both the Assessing Officer as well as the Appellate Authorities constituted under the Income Tax Act, 1961, to have due regard to the fact that their function is not merely to act as tax gatherers, but equally as quasi judicial authorities, they owe a duty of fairness to the assessee.
