"28 April 2019" Archive

HC dismisses petition against amendments in PMLA through Money Bill

Mr. Jairam Ramesh Vs Union of India And Ors (Delhi High Court)

Mr. Jairam Ramesh Vs Union of India and Ors (Delhi High Court) There is no dispute that the petitioner herein is a Member of Rajya Sabha. The plea of Mr. Chidambram that the petitioner was not aware that such amendments have been carried out as Money Bills, is no reason to challenge the amendments, at […]...

Read More

HC upheld provisions of Section 115BBDA: Tax on dividend above ₹ 10 Lakh

Rajan Bhatia Vs CBDT & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

Rajan Bhatia Vs CBDT (Delhi High Court) Section 115BBDA is a non-obstante provision that would apply and prevail over Section 10(34) of the Act. Section 115 BBDA states that notwithstanding anything contained in the Act, where the total income of a specified resident assessee, includes income by way of dividend declared, distributed or pa...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) on Disclosure of income due to search operation 

Brijesh Jaikishin Rupani Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

Brijesh Jaikishin Rupani Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT Mumbai held that The income offered by assessee in income filed pursuant to issue of notice under section 153A was the income detected during the course of search and seizure operation. The case of assessee was squarely covered by provisions of Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c), because...

Read More

Section 80IB(10) deduction cannot be denied merely because land was held by original owner during project execution

PCIT Vs Green Associates (Gujarat High Court)

Where assessee had claimed deduction under section 80-IB in respect to income of housing development project, the same could not be rejected merely because the land was held by original owner when the housing development project was executed, would not be detrimental to assessee’s claim of deduction under section 80-IB(10)....

Read More

High Court not justified in issuing remarks / direction against DCIT: SC

Sanjay Jain Vs Nu Tech Corporate Service Ltd. & Ors. (Supreme Court of India)

High Court was not justified in its remarks against the petitioner and in issuing the directions which it has issued. The High Court, in the course of its judgment has issued a slew of directions including: (i) The necessity of weeding out ‘deadwood’; (ii) imposition of costs of Rs. 1.5 lakhs which are to be apportioned among two offi...

Read More