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!
F. No. 142/11/2015-TPL Section 6(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, 2015, provided that a company is said to be resident in India in any previous year, if it is an Indian company or if during that year, the control and management of its affairs is situated wholly in India. This allowed tax avoidance opportunities for companies to artificially escape the residential status under these provisions by shifting insignificant or isolated events related with control and management outside India.
Factoring works mainly on the principle of seller selling the receivables of a debtor to a specialized financial intermediary called a factor. The sale of the receivables takes place at a discount and the ownership of the receivables is transferred to the factor who shall on purchase of receivables, collect the dues from the debtor […]
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of DCIT vs. J.B. Eng. Works that that the assessee had transferred independent interests in two different assets and therefore the Capital Gains arising on the assignment of leasehold interest in the land being a capital asset was rightly offered for tax as Long
ITAT Lucknow held In the case of Shri Jeevan Kumar Agarwal vs. ACIT that there is no specific provision in the Act requiring the assessment made under section 153A to be after issue of notice under section 143(2). In the case of Ashok Chaddha vs. CIT
ITAT Bangalore held In the case of DCIT vs. M/s. Parametric Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd. that the use of current year’s data is mandated by the relevant I.T. Rules, 1962 and by not adhering to this, the assessee’s TP Study was rendered unreliable.
ITAT Lucknow held In the case of M/s Treadstone International vs. ACIT that we find no merit in the contention of the assessee that every time new Officer should issue a notice u/s 143(2). Whenever jurisdiction is transferred from one Officer to other Officer the subsequent officer
ITAT Delhi held In the case of A2Z Maintenance and Engineering Services Ltd. vs. CIT that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of DIT vs Jyoti Foundation 357 ITR 388 (Delhi) held that where the order u/s 263 records that the inquiries were not sufficient and further inquiries
In this case of Trend Micro India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT Delhi Bench of ITAT observed that whether revenue can argue against the order passed by AO in pursuance to the directions of DRP. The ITAT held that it is not permissible to argue any issue decided by AO by DR before tribunal.
NOTIFICATION NO. 147/2015-CUSTOMS (N.T.) In exercise of the powers conferred by the second proviso to clause (ii) of sub- section (2) of section 61 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Excise and Customs, being satisfied that it is necessary so to do in the public interest, hereby specifies the class of goods, namely ‘crude’, imported and stored in underground rock caverns, in respect of which no interest shall be charged under the said section 61.
In the case of Shamsher singh verma vs. State of Haryana, the Apex court on the point of admissibility of evidence held that the ‘compact disc’ is also a document within the meaning of Section 3 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
