Discover the impact of delaying investments in your 20s and the benefits of starting early. Explore tax-saving and high-return investment options, setting financial goals, and planning for a secure future. Don’t let the common mistake of postponing investments affect your financial success.
KSCAA addresses Department of Legal Metrology in Karnataka, highlighting challenges faced in obtaining a Packing Registration. They emphasize the need for simplification, reducing wait times, and eliminating human intervention to promote ease of doing business.
CESTAT held that contract involving both supply of material and labour is a ‘Works Contract Service’ which was not taxable prior to June 1, 2007.
ITAT Indore held that reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 148 stood abated by virtue of search and seizure action u/s 132(1). Hence, reassessment order passed thereon u/s 147 is illegal.
CESTAT Delhi held that unless payment has been made for an independent activity of tolerating an act under an independent arrangement entered into for such activity or tolerating an act, such payment will not constitute ‘consideration’ and such activities will not constitute ‘supply’.
ITAT Kolkata held that addition towards difference between figure of gross receipts reported and figure reported in Form 26AS is unsustainable as the difference is merely because figure reported in Form 26AS was inclusive of service tax component.
ITAT Pune held that clause (c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. Accordingly, levy of fee u/s. 234E is imposable only from 01/06/2015 and not prior to that.
ITAT Mumbai held that reassessment proceedings u/s 148 within limitation period specified under section 149(1) of the Income Tax Act is valid and sustainable in law.
ITAT Ahmedabad has ruled that a penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not applicable when an assessee doesn’t furnish inaccurate income details. This ruling was made in the case of Khanpur Vibhag Madhyamik Shala Karmchari Dhiran & Grahak Sahakari Mandali Limited Vs ACIT
AOP inadvertently filed their income tax return using ITR 7 instead of ITR 5. ITAT held that Income Tax Authorities are not supposed to punish assessees for their bona fide mistake.
