The Adjudicating Authority had come to the conclusion that there being pre-existing dispute application deserves rejection. The disputes pertaining to contractual issues are not to be resolved in Section 9 proceedings.
Vidisha Singhal Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) AO admits that the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act is riddled with mistakes. He further admits that in the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act, the details of the transactions allegedly carried out by the petitioner were not correct. He states that […]
Neeraj Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) From the penalty order, we observe that the Assessing Officer nowhere stated that the notices issued u/s 142(1) of the Act were served on the assessee. In the entire penalty order we observe that the notices said to have been issued by the AO but it is not the […]
L&T Infra Debt Fund Limited Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITAT Mumbai) In the instant case, we notice that the AO did not examine the exemption claimed u/s 10(47) of the Act, meaning thereby, the assessment order has been passed by the AO without application of mind. The exemption so allowed without examining the claim would be […]
Mittal International Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) 1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act’) and notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, both dated 26th July, 2022 for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Learned counsel for the […]
Sathyanarayanan Radhika Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) ITAT noted that the loan amount of Rs. 1.25 Crores was taken in previous year from Shri R. Sathyanarayanan and the balance amount of Rs. 17,00,690/- was interest on the loan amount and this cannot be treated as unexplained and moreover, there is no failure of the provisions of […]
PFRDA takes a plethora of initiatives, enablers, empowerment kits & series of digitally enabled solutions for the large-scale adoption of NPS for the holistic retirement planning of the existing and prospective Subscribers.
Instruction No. 07 of 2022 DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX (SYSTEMS) ARA Centre, Ground Floor, E-2, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi-110055 F.No.: DGIT(Systems)-1/Instruction/241A/2022-23 Dated: 06.12.2022 To All Principal Chief Commissioners of Income Tax/CCsIT All Principal Director Generals of Income Tax /DGsIT All Principal Commissioners of Income Tax/CsIT/CsIT(Admin & TPS) All Principal Directors of Income Tax/DsIT Madam/Sir, Subject: – […]
Sai Pooja Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT observed that the taxable services in relation to provisions of Outdoor Caterer is defined under Section 65 of the Finance Act 1994 and attracting payment of service tax on the provisions of such services. However we find that there is Exemption vide […]
Shivi Mohan Rastogi Vs CPIO (CIC Delhi) Central Information Commission (CIC) upon a perusal of records and after hearing submissions of both the parties remarked at the outset that the core premise raised by the Appellant was non-receipt of certified copies of his TDS documents for the averred period. In response to it, the CPIO submitted that […]
