Narmada Drinks Pvt. Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Delhi) It is well known that the bottlers receive concentrate from the brand owners such as M/s Coca Cola, manufacture aerated products there from and sell the same. Para 6.2 of the relevant show cause notice alleges that the amounts have been received from the brand […]
5 things everyone should know before investing!! Stock market is not a gamble, it is a business. However, we make it a gamble by investing without knowledge. With market high and down can be frustrating for a new investor
Principal CIT Vs Manzil Dineshkumar Shah (Gujarat High Court) It is well settled that even in case where the original assessment is made without scrutiny, the requirement of the Assessing Officer forming the belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, would apply. Reference in this respect can be made of the judgment in […]
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Kolkata, (hereinafter the Ld. CIT(A)), dt. 22/09/2017, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act), relating to Assessment Year 2012-13
For motor vehicle owners in India, not having insurance for their vehicles is not an option. Irrespective of whether a vehicle is personal or commercial, all car owners within the nation are mandated to have at least a minimum level of insurance by law, as clearly specified under the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988. Today, […]
The learned CIT (Appeal) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in sustaining the order of the assessing officer holding that gift made by the assessee towards relinquishing 50% interest in the flat No. 52 at Ajanta Apartment, Colaba, Mumbai is a transfer within the meaning of section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act.
ITO Vs Upkar Retail (P.) Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad) We find guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. [1973] CTR (SC) 177 : [1972] 88 ITR 192 (SC) Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down a principle that “if two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are […]
As assessee received salary in cash, his claim that investments were made from such salary could not be brushed aside and keeping in view the overall facts and capacity of the assessee, addition under section 69 was deleted.
It is not disputed that section 40(a)(ia), Second proviso is for the benefit of the assessee and when a provision has been made in fiscal statute for benefit of assessee, in the absence of any express provision or a provision which by necessary implication gives a different impression, such provision which is beneficial to the assessee must be read and given effect to retroactively.
In this case, you can very well safely add the name of RBI also in the doomsayers of the Indian economy. Its an old adage that politics is the game of scoundrels. Therefore you can never expect anything good from them. However, the institutions are the custodians of the faith of the people & the conscious keepers.
