"20 December 2012" Archive

Advance forfeited under a dubious transaction is taxable u/s.68

Sh. Ashwani Oberoi Vs Commissioner of Income Tax and another (Punjab And Hariyana High Court)

We may notice the judgment of Apex Court in CIT v. United Trading & Construction Co., [2001] 247 ITR 819 that there is nothing in Section 24 of the Finance (no. 2) Act which prevents the Income Tax officer, if he is not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee about the genuineness of sources of amounts found credited in his books t...

Read More

Deduction U/s. 54/54F dallowable for purchase of multiple independent house units

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Syed Ali Adil (Andhra Pradesh High Court)

As held in D. Ananda Basappa's case (1 supra) by the Karnataka High Court, the expression a residential house in Section 54 (1) of the Act has to be understood in a sense that the building should be of residential nature and a should not be understood to indicate a singular number...

Read More

Deduction U/s. 80HHC cannot be claimed on profit on which deduction U/S. 80IA already been claimed

Commissioner of Income-tax-I, Ludhiana Vs Abhishek Industries Ltd. (Punjab And Hariyana High Court)

The respondent-assessee, in the present case, had in its return of income tax, claimed deduction under Section 80IA at Rs. 12.01 crores and Section 80HHC of the IT Act at Rs. 5.75 crores and declared the total income of Rs. 82.47 lacs. The AO allowed the deduction under Section 80IA to the tune of Rs. 14.04 crores and deduction under Sect...

Read More

HC cannot decide on leviability of excise duty on a particular product if issue is already pending before Apex Court

Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax Vs Jindal South West Steel Ltd. (Karnataka High Court)

The question of bar of limitation as well as setting aside the penalty is dependant on the leviability of excise duty on the impugned product. That is an issue which is to be decided by the Apex Court and the Apex Court is already seized of the matter. As the findings on that issue would have direct bearing in deciding the issues arisen i...

Read More

If company was not candid in its approach for repayment, winding up petition was rightly admitted

Chowringhee Prakashan (P.) Ltd. Vs Begwani Trade & Industries Pvt. Ltd. (Calcutta High Court)

The company was in business of publishing newspaper for almost a century. The main ingredient required for the purpose is news print. Hence, it is expected, the company would know the prevalent market rate. In any event, when the respondent agreed to give rebate, the company did not raise any protest. Their protest came when the responden...

Read More

Penalty for violation of takeover code to be imposed on each violator separately

R. Shankar Vs Securities & Exchange Board of India (Securities Appelate Tribunam Mumbai)

The allotment of shares on preferential basis to the appellants before us is not in dispute. The allotment of preferential shares was made to the connected parties as concluded by the adjudicating officer in the impugned order. The interconnection between them has also been clearly brought out by the adjudicating officer in the impugned o...

Read More

Regarding Implementation of Direct Cash Transfers under various schemes in EPFO

No. R-I/UID/2010/pt/ 27938 20/12/2012

No. R-I/UID/2010/pt/ 27938 The schemes of the EPFO involving transfer of benefits to the beneficiaries namely Pension, withdrawal of Provident Fund, premature withdrawal of Pension, Payment related to EDLI have been identified by Government for implementation of Direct Cash Transfers from 1StJanuary, 2013 in 43 pilot districts (list enclo...

Read More

‘Grossing up’ in absence of PAN should be at rates in force and not at 20%

Bosch Ltd. Vs Income-tax Officer, International Taxation, Bangalore (ITAT Bangalore)

A literal reading of sec. 195A implies that the income should be increased at the rates in force for the financial years and not the rates at which the tax is to be withheld by the assessee. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of GE India Technology (cited Supra) has held that the meaning and effect has to be given to the expression used i...

Read More

SAT – After justification of alleged manipulative transactions subsequent accusation of misuse of account by broker cannot absolve appellant from penalty

Sandeep Jain Vs Securities and Exchange Board of India (Securities Appelate Tribunal Mumbai)

We agree with learned counsel for the respondent Board that the alibi, that appellant does not understand English is not acceptable as he has given all his information in the KYC form in English and has also signed the said application form in English. His reply dated January 27, 2009 to the show cause notice is also in English where he h...

Read More

Regarding imposition of safeguard duty on imports of electrical insulator from China PR

Notification No. 05/2012-Customs (SG) 20/12/2012

Notification No. 05/2012-Customs (SG) New Delhi; the 20th December, 2012 G.S.R. 912(E).- WHEREAS, in the matter of import of electrical insulators, falling under tariff heading 8546 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Director General (Safeguard), in its final...

Read More

Search Posts by Date

October 2021