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!
Commissionerates should constitute a Recovery Cell as laid down in the aforesaid Circular, and only those cases where recovery is not made by Departmental efforts and action needs to be taken for recovery by attachment and sale of property of the defaulter, as laid down In section 142 of the Customs Act. should be transferred to the Recovery Cell.
CIT Vs Arvind Products Ltd. (Gujarat High Court) Assessee who was engaged in manufacturing textile products, had expended the amount in question for product development undertaken by a sister concern of the assessee on its behalf. The research work did not involve development of a new product or even a new technique or technology to […]
It was submitted by the assessee that the fees were paid for marketing service rendered outside India and hence, did not become chargeable to tax in India requiring tax deduction u/s. 195 of the Act.
Section 80D: Deduction Under Section 80D for Mediclaim Insurance Premium to Individual, HUF, Senior Citizens.
Where AO was of view that assessee had made bogus purchase on the ground that no proof of transportation and lorry receipt was filed, however, AO was not justified in making addition of 25% of purchase amount and addition was to be restricted to 5% of purchase.
1. Compliance Calendar for SME & SME – ITP Listed Companies under SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirement) (Amendment) Regulations (LODR) QUARTERLY COMPLIANCE SR.NO REGULATION REFERENCE FREQUENCY PERIOD COVERED DATE BY WHICH TO BE FILED MODE OF FILING 1. 13(3) – Statement Grievance Redressal Mechanism Quarterly April-June, July- September, October-December, January-March 21st July, 21st October, […]
Challenging the order dated 02.03.2015 in Appeal No 98/13-14/GZN/63 for the assessment year 2010-11 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Muzaffarnagar (for short hereinafter called as the learned CIT(A)), the assessee preferred this appeal.
Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Kerala High Court) Rule 9B(5) starts with a non-obstante Under the said rule, it is laid down that deduction under Rule 9B shall not be allowed unless the distributor credits in the books of accounts, the amounts realised by the distributor in case where the distributor himself has exhibited […]
We have come across cases wherein the tax invoice on the basis of which input tax credit (ITC) is availed do not contain all the particulars as stipulated by law. As an example place of supply or SAC is not stated. Issue for the present article is whether ITC can be validly claimed on such defective invoices ?
CIT Vs. Cactus Imaging India (P.) Ltd. (Madras High Court) It can be inferred that the machines ‘computer printers’ under consideration can either be called computers-printers, since a lot of independent functions done by the computers are done by these printers and they can be called an integral part of the computer system. It should […]
