Last date for updating KYC in Demat and Trading is 31st December 2021 Update your KYC else your Demat and Trading account will be made inactive. All Investors are requested to take note that as per Regulatory guidelines, 6-KYC attributes i.e. Name, PAN, Address, Mobile Number, Email-ID and Income Range have been made mandatory. This […]
Madhu Solanki Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) In the present case, First of all, the outstanding balances related to the purchases made during the year under consideration and not brought forward balances. The AO did not get reply from both the trade creditors and hence he proceeded to assess the outstanding balances, while accepting the purchases […]
United Waterproofing Corporation Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) We note that Ld. CIT(A) has enhanced the addition on account of bogus purchases to 100% of the bogus purchases as against 12.5% applied by the AO. The only reason given by the Ld. CIT(A) is that the assessee has failed to prove the genuineness of purchases and […]
Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax Vs Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (CESTAT Delhi) Having considered the rival contentions, I hold that once the four companies have become one, by merger, under operation of law w.e.f. 01.01.2015, as per order of the competent Court, the transactions between them during the effective date and the date […]
PCIT Vs Akzo Noble India Limited (Calcutta High Court) Issue– Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned ITAT, Kolkata has erred in law in deleting the disallowance of sum of Rs.3.50 Crores and Rs.2.11 Crores for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively on account of slump sale of […]
The allegation against the accused is that he was illegally exporting the antique which is said to be the idol of Lord Vishnu. On being satisfied with the grounds urged in the remand application, the accused was sent to the judicial custody.
Learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that the issue of SCN and culmination of the same in the impugned order in the name of amalgamating company is ex facie illegal and liable to be set aside. As issue of notice i.e., SCN and assessment qua a non-existent entity (albeit a juristic person) is a jurisdictional error warranting interference in writ jurisdiction is learned counsel’s say.
It should be kept in mind that the offences under Section 132(1)(b)(c)& (i) of the OGST Act are punishable with a maximum punishment of five years Rigorous Imprisonment. Therefore, investigation ought to be completed within 60 days as per Section 167 Cr.P.C. Of course, Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. permits the investigating agency to keep the investigation open. B
The assessee has not proved that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act does not have any application on the said payment of Rs.21,27,846. Hence, the A.O. was correctly disallowed the expenditure by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).
Considering the serious financial constraints of the assessee due to which it had failed to discharge its admitted self-assessment tax liability at the time of filing its return of income, and for a period thereafter, no penalty under Sec. 221(1) r.w.s 140A(3) could have even otherwise be imposed on it.
