Assessee sufficiently proved that the loss incurred on premature cancellation of forward contract was a ‘business loss’ inasmuch as the same was incurred in the course of carrying on of the business
Since the approval granted by Pr. CIT to AO for reopening of assessment was clearly without application of mind and was not as per the mandate of the provision of section 151, therefore, notice issued u/s 148 on the basis of such approval and consequent assessment made on the basis of such notice were bad in law and deserved to be quashed.
The provisions of section 2(24)(xi) read with section 28(vi), it is evident that the amount of bonus on Keyman Insurance Policy is to be taxed on receipt basis only.
AUDITING AND ASSURANCE STANDARDS BOARD CONSTITUTES EXPERT PANEL FOR ADDRESSING BANK BRANCH AUDIT RELATED QUERIES FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2018-19 Dear Members, The bank audit season is around the corner. Given the fact that the banking industry is typical in terms of its geographical and customer spread, the volume and varied nature of products and […]
CBDT notifies Form Sahaj (ITR-1), Form ITR-2, Form ITR-3, Form Sugam (ITR-4), Form ITR-5, Form ITR-6, Form ITR-7 and Form ITR-V for A.Y. 2019-20 / F.Y. 2018-19 vide Notification No. 32/2019 dated 1st April, 2019. MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Revenue) (CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES) Notification No. 32/2019 New Delhi, the 1st April, 2019 […]
Returns which were filed prior to 01.04.2019 without quoting of Aadhaar number as an outcome of any decision of different High Courts in a specific case or returns which were filed during the period when the online functionality for filing the return without quoting of Aadhaar number was so available
PCIT Vs N. R. Portfolio (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: The conduct of the assessee was speculative, it was not an uninformed litigant; it calculatedly chose not to question the rejection of its cross objection. Instead, waited more than a year after the decision of this court (which was rendered on 21-12-2012) till the two members […]
Where both searched assessees were brothers and were involved in the common business and assessee used to be in-charge of the accounts, there was no necessity of issuing notice under Section 153C separately to assessee in case they lived separately, but in the same building.
Deduction under section 54 was allowable on purchase of flats as merely because assessee, by ignorance of law or mistake, had claimed deduction under section 54F instead of section 54, such ignorance of law/mistake on the part of assessee could not be utilized to its disadvantage by AO.
Requirement of the formation of the opinion as to the special audit being in the interest of the Revenue continues to apply before and after the amendment. Nevertheless, the basic essential requirements of exercising the powers have been substantially widened by the legislature by way of such amendment.
