ITAT Bangalore held that the deposit of gold jewellery by family members of a partner in the partnership firm would be treated as the stock in trade of the firm as agreement between the firm and the partners provides that the jewellery given by the partner can be used by the firm and sold by the firm.
Vidisha Singhal Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) AO admits that the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act is riddled with mistakes. He further admits that in the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act, the details of the transactions allegedly carried out by the petitioner were not correct. He states that […]
ITAT Mumbai held that Honble jurisdictional High Court order in case of CIT v Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council has held that none of the conditions attached to the grant affected the voluntary nature of the contribution and accordingly they would be exempt under section 12 of the Act and it is settled law that decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is binding upon subordinate Tribunal and courts.
Jamna Devi Vs ITO (Rajasthan High Court) The matter comes up for consideration of the application (CMCC No.97/2022) preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act on behalf of the appellant-assessee with a prayer to condone the delay of 1060 days caused in filing the present income tax appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant-assessee has […]
Sunita W/O Bharatkumar Aitawade Vs Vidya W/O Sagar Aitawade (Karnataka High Court) The cheque in question was issued on 01.08.2019. The petitioners, who were the Directors of the Company, ceased to be the Directors of the Company with effect from 22.03.2017 which is evident from the Form No.DIR-12 issued by Registrar of the Companies and the same […]
The attachment as per Section 83(2) shall cease to have effect after a period of one year from date of order of attachment. Thus, pending writ petition, the impugned order has ceased to have effect, as on 15.09.2020.
ITAT Bangalore held that order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act is invalid as the same does not have any Document Identification Number.
ITAT Mumbai held that depreciation cannot be disallowed as application of income under section 11(6) of the Income Tax Act when the assessee has not claimed purchase of asset as application of income in any of the previous years.
Neeraj Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) From the penalty order, we observe that the Assessing Officer nowhere stated that the notices issued u/s 142(1) of the Act were served on the assessee. In the entire penalty order we observe that the notices said to have been issued by the AO but it is not the […]
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Oil contained in Bunker Tanks in Engine Room of Vessel imported for breaking up is classifiable under CTH 8908 along with such vessel.
