Addition of on-money payment made in both these assessees’ hands on the basis of a mere dumb document and not corroborated by any other evidence was not sustainable as the department had failed to corroborate the impugned seized document indicating assessee’s alleged on money payment over and above the sale price itself.
CIT had erred in law and as on facts in withdrawing assessee’s approval granted u/s.10(23C)(vi) as the impugned entire exercise to withdraw assessee’s approval suffered from inherent lack of jurisdiction.
Since the definition of Business Support Service was amended w.e.f. 01.05.2011 to include ‘operational or administrative assistance in any manner’ hence, the services in relation to operational and administrative assistance could only be taxed post the said amendment and not before that.
CIT was not justified in exercising his powers under section 263 and considering the assessment order passed by AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue as AO after appreciating the complete documentary evidences placed on record and applying his mind to the facts of the case, accepted the evidences filed by assessee and had taken a possible view.
Southern Railways had to pay the GST Tax with reference to the license fee collected from the contractors and the contractors were liable to pay the service tax with reference to the parking fee collected from the customers, who all were end users.
High Court quashed the order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) imposing royalty taxation for ‘Adwords program’ as the material on the basis of which the order had been passed by Tribunal was not furnished to the appellant at any point time, the order passed by the Tribunal was certainly violative of principles of natural justice and fair play as the appellant was not afforded an opportunity to rebut fresh evidence especially when such evidence was based on Google study.
Venugopal Naidu Pushparaj Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) Conclusion: Once assessee adopted the cost of these 7 flats received under JDA for the purpose of offering the capital gain, same to be considered as cost of construction from the sale consideration of flats received from the developer under the agreement. Held: AO initiated re-assessment proceedings on the […]
Once the substantive assessment in the case of Mr. Siya Ram Gupta was confirmed , the protective assessment had no independent standing but dependent on the final outcome of the substantive assessment. CIT(A) was right for deleting the addition on protective basis on the ground that AO had already taxed the same in the hands of Mr. Siya Ram Gupta on substantive basis.
Courts were expected to ensure that all such legal grounds available to the parties were adjudicated before the proper forum and only after exhausting the statutory remedies, writ petitions were to be entertained. Therefore, High court ordered assessee to exhaust the appellate remedy, either under Section 128 or Section 129 of the Customs Act, respectively and the courts must not provide an unnecessary opportunity to escape from liability merely on jurisdictional error.
State was not expected to provide all essential infrastructure, medication and treatment facilities at once, but if the people were taken into confidence with regard to the efforts being made by the State to take care of the people suffering from the pandemic, the people at large would definitely cooperate and appreciate the efforts being made by the State.
