Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Archive: 23 September 2015

Posts in 23 September 2015

Postmortem of Union Budget 2024: A Comprehensive Webinar

July 16, 2024 3873 Views 3 comments Print

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!

Live Course on 360 degree Analysis of Input Tax Credit from a Litigation Perspective

July 14, 2024 3501 Views 0 comment Print

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!

Writ in Karnataka HC for Extension of TAR/ITR Due Date

September 23, 2015 13111 Views 0 comment Print

Karnataka State Chartered Accountant Society (KSCAA) & Sri.Raveendra S.Kore vs Union of India & CBDT (Karnataka High Court ), Writ Petition (WP) 41109/2015, 41110/2015. Updated on 28.09.2015- Hon’ble Karnataka high court directed CBDT to consider the representation of KSCAA by 29.09.2015. –

Addition in case of own mischief of assessee will not amount to double taxation – HC

September 23, 2015 1615 Views 0 comment Print

Bombay High court held In the case of R.B. Shreeram Durgaprasad (P) Ltd. vs. The CIT that concept of double taxation is not attracted in the present matter. The Export firm has to pay tax as it has actually utilized that amount as its income while the assessee has to pay tax as it attempted to conceal that income.

Periodic payments are covered under section 40(c)(iii) but Lumpsum Payment are not : HC

September 23, 2015 4054 Views 0 comment Print

Bombay High court held In the case of M/s Nagpur Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT. that in order to attract ceiling u/s 40(c), the payment must be a periodical payment. A Lumsum payment or one time payment is not covered under section 40(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961.

Deduction U/s. 80P(2)(a) allowable to Co-Op. banks on Commission on collection of electricity bills & prepayment facility: HC

September 23, 2015 2864 Views 0 comment Print

Bombay High court held In the case of CIT vs. Amravati District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. that following the judgment of (2003) 264 ITR (38) (Bom.) (CIT vs. Ahmednagar District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd.)

Distance for agricultural land prior to A.Y. 2014-15 is to be measured by approach road & not by straight line/ aerial method : HC

September 23, 2015 3880 Views 0 comment Print

Bombay High court held In the case of The CIT vs. Nitish Rameshchandra Chordia & others. that amendments in the statute unless a different legislative intention is clearly expressed, shall operate prospectively.

Loan to Shareholders in the course of lending business cannot be treated as deemed dividend

September 23, 2015 815 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Kolkata has held in the case ITO Vs. Piyush Jalan that where lending of money is substantial part of the business of the concerned company and any advance or loan is made by it to a shareholder in the ordinary course of its business

Section 68 Cannot be invoked merely on the basis of Presumptions

September 23, 2015 1629 Views 0 comment Print

It has been held in case of Mukesh V. Prajapati Vs ITO (Ahmedabad ITAT), that the amount of cash credits shown as loan taken from various relatives , cannot be added as unexplained credit under sec 68 just on the presumption that the sources of the fund is not genuine

Section 68 Cannot be invoked if Creditor’s Identity, Mode of Payment & Repayment proved

September 23, 2015 1085 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of M/s. Jindal (India) Textiles Vs. ITO the Hon’ble ITAT held that once creditors’ identity, mode of payment and repayment, assessee’s books of accounts proved the impugned credit transactions

Keyman insurance expenses allowable if conditions u/s 10(10D) fulfilled

September 23, 2015 4923 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Suri Sons vs. ACIT – ITAT Amritsar has held that that once life insurance policy has been sold as a life insurance policy on the keyman to the business, as long as it is in the nature of life insurance policy

Anti-dumping duty could not be added for computing customs duty, SCD & SAD: SC

September 23, 2015 2452 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of M/S. Jaswal Neco Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Customs , it was held by Supreme Court that anti-dumping duty could not be added for computing customs duty, Special Customs Duty and Special Additional Duty by referring to the judgment in the case of Commissioner of Customs

Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031