Shriraj Investment and Finance Ltd. & Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr. (Delhi High Court) Delhi HC: Where the case has been admitted in NCLT, all the contentions including power to initiate such proceeding should be raised before and concluded by NCLT only Shriraj Investment Pvt. Ltd. (Petitioner No. 1) and Casper Consumer Electronics […]
Appellant contended that such contribution is made for empowerment of women however, the CIT(A) in its order observed that although the expenditure was for a noble cause, it has no nexus contribution made and the income generated for the business of the Appellant company under Section 37 of the IT Ac
Jayaseelan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) Shri Jayaseelan (the Appellant) has filed the current appeal being aggrieved against the order dated March 5, 2018 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (the CIT(A)) for the assessment year 2014-15 wherein the claim of the Appellant claiming benefit under section 54 of the Income Tax Act,1961 […]
Ramaiah Harish Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) It was held that an independent building can have a number of residential units and it will not lose the character of one residential house.
Appellant, during AY 2012-2013, paid a huge amount towards provision of toilet facilities in Government Schools where the children of employees of the Appellant were studying. While filing the returns for that year, the Appellant claimed the same amount as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenses and submitted that by incurring the expenses, its productivity improves and the loyalty of its employees are also ensured.
Finally, after facing every step of hurdle during past financial year, the final goal of every taxpayer is to assess their business records and analyse and correct the mistakes made during the past financial year either through GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B of September, 2021, following the end of financial year, being 2020- 21 Section 110 and […]
The provisions of the Customs Act and that of the HCCR do not absolve the custodian of the responsibilities as mentioned in these Regulations to be observed by the Custodians itself, the CESTAT do not find any infirmity with the order under challenge where simultaneously penalty has been imposed upon the Appellant as well.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of RE COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION [Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in SMW(C) No. 3/2020 dated April 27, 2021] under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India took suo motu cognizance considering the challenges faced by the litigants on account of COVID-19 and restored […]
Tapas Kumar Basak Vs Assistant Director of Income Tax, International Taxation-II & Ors (Calcutta High Court) Tapas Kumar Basak (Petitioner) has challenged the impugned order dated January 25, 2007 passed by the Director of Income Tax (International Taxation), Kolkata (Respondent) treating the Petitioner as ‘Resident’ for having stayed in India for 182 days during the […]
CESTAT applied the User Test to the facts in hand and held that the structural items used in the fabrication of support structures would fall within the ambit of Capital Goods as contemplated under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, hence will be entitled to the Cenvat Credit.
