Delhi High Court held that co-accused permitted to apply separately for compounding of offences committed by a Company or HUF. Accordingly, matter remitted back to decide afresh in light of CBDT circular dated 17.10.2024.
It was argued on behalf of assessee that PCIT is wrong in concluding that return filed u/s 44AD did not envisage the maintenance of any Books of Accounts. Section 68 can be invoked only if there is any entry in the Books of Accounts.
ITAT restores gratuity addition matter to CIT(A) in Vaddadi Madhusudana Rao’s appeal despite 1-day delay in filing the appeal.
In the abovementioned case ITAT remanded the matter to CIT (A) after considering the fact that no proper opportunity was availed by assessee before CIT (A) and revenue has no objection in remanding the matter.
ITAT quashes S.263 revision order and annuls CIT(A) order in Kolet Resort Club Pvt Ltd case due to invalid assessment for AY 2015-16.
ITAT Ahmedabad remands Ashadeep Industries vs. ITO for rehearing, emphasizing procedural fairness and opportunity to be heard under natural justice principles.
Orissa High Court rules that delayed audit reports under Section 41(4) of the OVAT Act cannot justify subsequent proceedings, setting aside related assessments.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that department imposed anti-dumping duty on un-printed sheets treating it to be Taiwanese origin, hence burden of proof lies on department to establish the same. In absence of any proof, demand cannot be sustained.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that inadvertent mentioning of wrong area in Form 10CCB resulted into denial of claim u/s. 80IC. Thus, clam allowed since it is proved that establishment of assessee exists in eligible area. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Ahmedabad directs CIT(A) to decide the denial of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) due to delay filing of Form No. 67 to be decided with other pending appeal of the same assessment year. Accordingly, matter remitted to CIT(A).
