In the case of ITO Vs. Sh. Mahender Singh, ITAT Delhi has held that addition cannot be made for Cash deposits in the bank account received against sale of land as undisclosed investment for mere failure of Assessee to Produce
ICAI vide representation made to CBDT has requested to to grant extension for filing of Income Tax Return for A.Y. 2015-16 up to 30th September in case of Individual and HUF and up to 31st December in case of Companies. It also requested to consequential extension in due date of filing Tax Audit Report to 31.12.2015.
CA Sujeet Kumar With the advent of Digital India, as and when our PM talks about to make a digital India, the pace of technology has been grown up and everywhere Govt. has emphasized on each and every thing in India should be done with technology or should be kept with the help of technology. […]
Banking has become an essential part of our life. Money matters everywhere. It’s the lifeline for banks. Even the richest person needs to keep money with a bank only. The dealings with banks and conduct of accounts go a long way in determining the benefits a person derives from them.
Recently SC held that in exercising legislative power, the legislature by mere declaration, without anything more, cannot directly overrule, revise or override a judicial decision. It can render judicial decision ineffective by enacting valid law on the topic within its legislative field fundamentally altering or changing its character retrospectively.
‘On money’ received by the assessee did not have the character of income but was only an advance like the one received through cheque. Both will become part of the sale consideration to the assessee simultaneously on either handing over the possession of the flats or on execution of transfer deed whichever happens earlier.
The dividend can be received or deemed to have been received only by shareholder of the company, therefore, the provisions of section 2(22)(e) enlarging the scope of dividend under the express deemed dividend cannot be invoked in case of a person who is not a shareholder of the company who has advance the loan.
Tribunal in this above case decided two debatable issues. Firstly that the mistake can be rectified after assessment attained finality and assessee had accepted the assessment order. The same is decided by the tribunal in the light of decision of apex court.
Lump-sum payments are covered under the term royalty. The agreement postulated grant of permission to use or right to use intellectual property rights or knowhow and it is not a case of outright sale.
Karnataka High Court held In the case of The CIT & ITO vs. Smt. B S Shanthakumari that the purpose of provisions u/s 54F is to ensure that assessee who received capital gains would invest the same by constructing a residential house and once it is established that consideration so received on transfer
