Delhi High Court held that income of agricultural land is exempt from tax and hence the same cannot be added to the books profit while calculating MAT under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act.
It is the case of the petitioner that this e-mail order was not received by the petitioner, in as much as the e-mail ID to which the order had been sent, had become inactive and was not being used by the petitioner.
NCLAT Delhi held that electricity supply by NPCL, being in nature of supply of essential goods, was necessary to be continued during the period of moratorium (CIRP period).
When the return is filed in the Telangana Portal and credit got transferred on the same day to Maharashtra portal, the department has no justifiable reason to deny the same or take action against the petitioner.
NCLAT Delhi held that personal liability cannot be fastened on Resolution Professional for any payment made after CIRP, where such payment is made with the approval of CoC.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as allowability of deprecation on non-compete fee is highly contentious as different views are taken by various High Courts and matter is pending before Supreme Court.
Madras High Court held that the entire stamp duty amount as demanded by the authorities has been paid even during the pendency of the appeal, hence demand of interest for belated payment unjustified.
ITAT Chennai confirmed penalty imposed under section 271B of the Income Tax Act for non-furnishing audit report, in absence of any reasonable or sufficient cause for not complying with legal provisions of section 44AB of the Income Tax Act.
Delhi High Court held that the receipts from Indian customers for services provided outside Indian Territory, in connection with use or right to use of process or equipment by the assessee company, cannot be taxed as royalty as per section 9(l)(vi) of the Income Tax Act.
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that FIR, registering offence u/s. 304-A, 34 of the IPC, against managing director of the company on account of failure in putting safety signs on either side of culvert so as to prevent any accident of road user justifiable.
