AO failed to follow the procedure as prescribed under section 50C(2), held that the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the action of the AO in adopting deemed sale consideration in violation of section 50C(2) of the Act. Actual sale consideration adopted for LTCG
Assessee submitted medical certificate justifying delay. Accordingly held that there was sufficient cause for condoning the delay in the institution of appeal before the CIT(A) by the assessee.
It is normal presumption that, if the deposits have been made from the cash balance available in the books of accounts, then the sources of the cash would stand explained and hence, there is no necessity to treat it as unexplained deposits warranting addition.
Held that tribunal in assessee’s co-owner case has taken holistic view in adoption of fair market value as DVO has himself stated in his report that the impugned land was situated at a more appropriate location as compared to sale instances considered by him.
It is a settled position of law that in case of a conflict between public interest and personal interest, public interest will outweigh the personal interest.
Ajet Ali Baidya Alias Ajet Baidya And Others Vs The State of West Bengal And Others (Calcutta High Court) Right to property is a valuable right flowing from Article 300A of the Constitution of India, merely on the ground of delay, the State cannot deny its obligation to compensate the petitioners. Facts- The writ petitioners prayed […]
I hold that CPC has no jurisdiction of adjustment u/s. 143(1) on this issue where admittedly there were decisions in favour of the assessee from the Hon’ble High Courts
Deputy Director of Income Tax Vs Bhavya Bishnoi & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Application to release passport under Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 dismissed on account of Lookout Circular issued against the applicant. Facts- This application has been filed by Mr. Kuldeep Bishnoi, father of the respondent […]
CIT Vs Microsoft Corporation (Delhi High Court) The amounts paid by resident Indian end-users/distributors to nonresident computer software manufacturers/suppliers, as consideration for the resale/use of the computer software through EULAs/distribution agreements, is not the payment of royalty for the use of copyright in the computer software, and that the same does not give rise to […]
The admitted position in the present case is that the assessee did not file any valuation report to substantiate the fair market value of shares issued in terms of Sec.56(2)(viib) (a)(i) of the Act and Rule 11UA of the Rules.
