"27 February 2018" Archive

Attachment of bank A/cs U/s. 226(3) not justified as dept already recovered more than 15% of disputed demand

Sesa Resources Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT & Ors. (Bombay High Court At Goa Bench)

Revenue was not justified in issuing the impugned attachment notices under section 226(3), since they had already recovered more than 15 per cent of the disputed demand in view of the Office Memorandum issued by CBDT....

Read More

HC clarifies on Carry forward of unabsrobed depreciation on 1st day of April, 2002

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax- 2 Vs. British Motor Car Co. (Delhi High Court)

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay in re-filing the present appeal is hereby condoned....

Read More

Lease equalization charges not to be added back in computing book profits U/s. 115JA

Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Mgf India Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

The Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi versus M/S. MGF India Ltd wherein dismissed the revenues appeal and held that lease equalization charges can be deducted while computing book profit. ...

Read More

Section 148 notice without proper sanction U/s. 151(1) is invalid

Maruti Clean Coal & Power Ltd Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Chhattisgarh High Court)

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed assailing the notice dated 28.03.2017 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) and also the order dated 25.09.2017 whereby the objections preferred by the petitioner questioning the issuance of notice dated 28.03.2017 was rej...

Read More

Amount disallowed u/s 14A cannot be added to arrive at book profit for MAT Calculation

CIT Vs. Bengal Finance & Investments Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)

ribunal followed its decision in M/s. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. v/s. DCIT to held that an amount disallowed under Section 14­A of the Act cannot be added to arrive at book profit for purposes of Section 115JB of the Act....

Read More

No more adjournments, No more ‘tareek pe tareek’: Bombay HC

Ram Nagar Trust No. 1 Vs. Mehtab L Sheikh (Bombay High Court)

No more adjournments. No more tareek pe tareek. Enough is enough. That a Court will endlessly grant adjournments is not something that parties or advocates can take for granted. Nor should they assume that there will be no consequences to continued defaults and unexplained delay...

Read More

Service tax not payable on retreading of Old Tyres prior to 16.06.2005

M/s Stallion Rubbers Limited Vs. CCE (CESTAT Delhi)

For the period prior to 16.06.2005, it was held that the activity of retreading of tyres restore the tyres to its functional form and the same will not come under the category of Maintenance or Repair....

Read More

Invocation of Explanation 7 to Section 271(1)(c) in blanket manner is contrary to purpose for which it was engrafted in statute

Pr CIT Vs. Verizon India Pvt. Ltd (Delhi High Court)

In the absence of any overt act, which disclosed conscious and material suppression, invocation of Explanation 7 to s. 271(1)(c) in a blanket manner could not only be injurious to the assessee but ultimately would be contrary to the purpose for which it was en grafted in the statute....

Read More

Last Chance to File Income Tax Return for year 2015-16 and 2016-17 31st March 2018

Arjuna, the month of March is very important for all Taxpayers. In our Country, the Financial Year April to March is applicable for all Tax Laws. That’s why Books of Accounts are made for the period of April to March. In Budget 2017 Stringent provisions relating to filing of Income Tax Returns have been made....

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

No Service Tax on development of plots in slum locality under the category of Construction of Residential Complex Service

M/s Tirathdas Shaukat Rai Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE (CESTAT Delhi)

M/s Tirathdas Shaukat Rai Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE (CESTAT Delhi) 1. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 8thAugust, 2012 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Indore. The appellants are engaged in construction activities. The dispute in the present appeal relates to two main activities of the appellant, namely const...

Read More

Search Posts by Date

July 2021