Jayashree Kothari Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) Sec. 50C(2) enables the Assessing Officer to make a reference to the Valuation Officer. Whenever a reference is made by the AO to the Valuation Officer, such reference has to be construed as a reference made under sec. 16A(1) of the Wealth-tax Act. We have also carefully gone through […]
The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by AO u/s 68 of Income tax Act, 1961 is justified in law?
Notification No. 23/2018-Customs (N.T./CAA/DRI) Director General, Revenue Intelligence, hereby appoints the Additional Director General (Adjudication), Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi to act as a common adjudicating authority for the purpose of adjudicating the matters relating the Show Cause
Notification No. 22/2018-Customs (N.T./CAA/DRI) Director General, Revenue Intelligence, hereby appoints officers mentioned in column (5) of the Table below to act as a common adjudicating authority to exercise the powers and discharge the duties conferred or imposed on officers mentioned in column (4) of the said Table in respect of noticees mentioned in column (2) of the said Table for the purpose of adjudication of show cause notices mentioned in column (3) of the said Table, namely:-
The regulatory framework for Institutional Trading Platform was put in place vide amendments to the SEBI (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2009 on August 14, 2015, with a view to facilitate listing of new age start-ups in sectors like e-commerce, data analytics, bio-technology and other start-ups.
Central Government hereby establishes office of Registrar of Companies cum Official Liquidator at Dehradun, having territorial jurisdiction in whole State of Uttarakhand for discharging functions of Registrar of Companies
Notification under section 454 of CAompanies Act, 2013 dated 26.10.2018- Appointment of RoCs as adjudicating officers with jurisdiction and their appellate authorities u/s 454 of CA 2013. Ministry of Corporate Affairs Notifications New Delhi, Dated: 26.10.2018 S.O. 5459(E)._ In exercise of the powers conferred by section 454 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013) […]
The short question in this appeal is whether the writ petition ought to have been dismissed on the sole ground that the appellant had a right of reply to the show cause notice. The answer to the aforesaid question has to be in the negative, for the reasons discussed hereinbelow.
Gautam Jhunjhunwala Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) in the light of the definition of ‘transfer’ as defined u/s. 2(47) of the Act it is clear that when any right in respect of any capital assets is extinguished and that right is transferred to someone, it would amount to transfer of a capital asset. In the light […]
ITO Vs Sunil Shiv Khanna (ITAT Mumbai) We are of the view that the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s. 54 of the Act is to be reckoned from the date of handing over of the possession of the flat by the builder to the assessee i.e. 11.09.2009, and if we take that date, the assessee […]
