"October, 2019" Archive - Page 8

After conclusion of proceedings u/s 147 AO cannot take aid of Exp. 3 to Section 147 to make any addition

M/s JDC Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)

M/s JDC Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) A careful reading of Section 147 clearly shows that it empowers the learned AO to assess or re-assess the income in respect of any issue which had escaped the assessment irrespective of the fact that whether such aspect was adverted to in respect of the reasons […]...

Read More

Term “recovery” includes adjustment thereby reducing demand: Section 220/245

Volvo Group India Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)

i) The term recovery is comprehensive and includes adjustment thereby reducing the demand; (ii) It will be specious & illogical for the Revenue to contend that if an issue is decided in favour of the assessee giving rise to a refund in an earlier year, that refund can be adjusted u/s 245, on account of the demand on the same issue in a su...

Read More

Addition for outstanding loan repaid by assessee subsequently was unjustified

ITO Vs Habitat Infrastructure Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)

Since the unaccounted money as alleged by the AO was the loan, which was repaid subsequently by assessee, addition made on account of unverifiable unsecured loans was unjustified....

Read More

Procedure for payment of RCM Liability under GST

Section 9(3) of the CGST Act states that the Government shall notify the supply of goods or services, the tax on which shall be paid under RCM. Vide Notification No. 13/2017 – CT (R) dated 28th June, 2017, the government has notified such services on which tax shall be paid under RCM. Now, Section 31(3)(f) […]...

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

Gujarat HC explains Limitation period to challenge possession under SARFAESI Act

Manglesh Champaklal Gandhi Vs Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. (Gujarat High Court)

Manglesh Champaklal Gandhi Vs Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. (Gujarat High Court) It is clear that on reading the provisions of Section 13(4) of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 with Rule 8 of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, the Court held that once possession not...

Read More

Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019-5 Major Clarifications

Circular No. 1073/06/2019-Central Excise 29/10/2019

Representations have also been received that the cases where appeals were filed after 30.06.2019 should also be allowed relief under the Scheme. It is stated that such cases are not covered per se. However, if a taxpayer withdraws the appeal and furnishes the undertaking to the department in terms of Para 2(viii) of Circular No. 1072/05/2...

Read More

Treatment of Share Based Payments as per AS, IND AS and IFRS

TREATMENT OF SHARE BASED PAYMENTS WHILE PREPARING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS PER AS, IND AS AND IFRS (LATEST AND SIMPLIFIED) The relevant Accounting Standards relating to Share Based Payments are the following:- a. INDAS 102 b. IFRS 2 c. Guidance Note issued by ICAI There is no major difference between INDAS 102 and IFRS 2.Therefore, the [&h...

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

CCC, Mumbai-II: Actions needs to be taken to help Exporters & Mitigate Corruption-2nd story

The Finance Minister assured that the refunds of the exporters will be handled on top priority. However, if the field formations are run as personal fiefdom, there is no scope for any success. More so when you are working in a legally oriented manner i.e. you are citing the responsibilities & obligations of the officials […]...

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

Section 271BA: No Penalty for bonafide failure in filing of Form No. 3CEB

Shree Ram Dass Rice & General Mills Vs DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh)

Where assessee failed to upload the report electronically in Form No. 3CEB but said report was promptly made available in the assessment proceedings itself, said failure was accepted as bona fide and accordingly, the penalty levied under section 271BA was to be quashed....

Read More

Deduction U/s. 54 on Gain from Relinquishment of right in bungalow

Bhavin Piyushbhai Palkhiwala Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Relinquishment deed was made in financial year 2008-09. Thus, if any tax was required to be levied, then the same was to be levied in assessment year 2009-10, i.e., next year. Hence, assessee was entitled to benefit under section 54....

Read More

Search Posts by Date

July 2021