ITAT Bangalore held that disallowance as per section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act sustained as amount of employees’ share of contribution of PF/ESI not paid within due date stipulated in the respective Act.
NCLAT Chennai rejected grant of condonation of delay in filing of the ‘Claim under Form-C’ as sufficient cause not shown and IBC is a time bound process.
ITAT Mumbai held that the disclosure made by the tax auditor in audit report in Form 3CD about the ‘Details of contributions received from employees for various funds as referred to in section 36(1)(va)’ would now become indicative of a disallowance, hence provisions of section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act would get attracted.
ITAT Delhi held that Common Area Maintenance charges (CAM Charges) paid by the assessee are liable for 2% TDS u/s 194C of the Income Tax Act and not at 10% u/s 194I of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition unsustainable as assessee has proved the three ingredients engraved in section 68 of the Act and proved the satisfactory nature of the loan transactions. On the otherhand, AO has not brought any contrary material to show that loan received is bogus or accommodation entries.
Madras High Court rules in favor of Packirisamy Senthilkumar, ensuring fair tax process and correcting procedural errors under Section 148A(d).
In the case of Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. vs DCIT, the Bombay High Court examines the requirement of tangible material for reopening an assessment. This analysis explores the claim of deduction on payment made to settle a class action suit and the court’s decision
Read the full text of the judgment/order of the Bombay High Court in the case of Oerlikon Balzers Coating India Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India. The court strikes down a condition in DTVSV, benefiting the assessee.
Explore 101 FAQs on the statutory powers of the Government’s Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) in India, covering NCB’s statutory powers, legal status of narcotic drugs, NCB’s vision and mission, and contact details. Get insights into drug trafficking trends, opium and heroin seizures, and case studies.
CESTAT held that where the differential duty paid by the assessee is available as CENVAT credit to the Assessee’s sister concern then it is a revenue-neutral situation. Thus, as duty was not actually payable, the payment of interest does not arise in the case of revenue neutral situation.
