ITAT Surat imposed cost of Rs. 10,000 on the applicant for non-furnishing of requisite details post application for registration filed in Form No.10AB. Accordingly, matter remanded back to the file of CIT(E).
ITAT Mumbai held that PCIT is empowered to issue a show- cause notice and pass a revision order u/s. 263 of the Act when reassessment order passed by AO was quite cryptic. Accordingly, order of PCIT upheld and appeal of assessee dismissed.
ITAT Mumbai held that date of allotment letter, rather than date on which purchase deed of conveyance was entered, should be considered for holding period of the property. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
Supreme Court held that arbitration proceeding culminating into award post approval of resolution plan by NCLT is not tenable in law since Facilitation Council loses its jurisdiction to proceed and pronounce arbitral award in view of approved resolution plan.
Kerala High Court held that 100% Export Oriented Unit i.e. EOU is itself a customs bonded unit and hence no reason exists to deny permission to the petitioner to remove the cashew kernels covered by Bill of Entry to be re-processed in its own customs bonded premises.
ITAT Pune held that application of cash received from unrecorded cash sales needs verification since assessee claims that it is applied for giving advance to the farmers for purchase of raw material and also for expansion of the existing showroom.
The right to correct mistakes in the nature of clerical or arithmetical error is a right that flows from the right to do business and should not be denied unless there is a good justification and reason to deny benefit of correction.
Delhi High Court held that mere rejection of the Petitioner’s request for cross-examination cannot be treated as a sufficient ground to bypass the statutorily prescribed appellate remedy and invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, writ disposed of.
ITAT Hyderabad held that profit estimation cannot be arbitrary or without any basis. Accordingly, estimation of profit @6% on total contract receipts is reduced to 4%. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed.
Delhi High Court held that reassessment order passed under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act beyond the scope of notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act is not sustainable and liable to be set aside.
