The CBEC and States have received many complaints that in view of the works contract service tax rate under GST at 12%in respect of under construction flats, complex etc, the people who have booked flats and made part payment before 1st July, 2017
The AO’s reason for re-opening is that along with the certificate in Form 56F, which was the certificate of the CA, the working sheet of deduction was not enclosed. That was not a requirement of law. What Form 56F has to be accompanied with is specified under the Income Tax Rules itself. The mere fact […]
Section 254(2) of the Act refers to the period of limitation reckoning from the end of the month in which the order is passed and not from the date of ‘date of receipt of the served/ received are not interchangeable and the Legislature in its wisdom expressly used the phraselogy depending on the intention. In the instant case, the expression passed cannot be stretched to mean that the period of limitation should be reckoned from the date of receipt of the order.
The present appeal arises out of the order dated 12.08.2004 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Chartered Accountants Reference No. 5/2000.
Customs officers may draw the samples from import consignments for testing, wherever needed. The results of all test reports, adverse or otherwise, is communicated to the importer or his authorized representative/ Customs Broker immediately on its receipt.
Seeks to continue anti-dumping in force concerning imports of ‘polytetraflouroethylene or PTFE’ originating in exported from China PR.
I urge all Chief Commissioners to monitor disposal of pendency of Commissioner (Appeals) to ensure that all legacy cases are disposed off by 31st December, 2017. In this regard, a detailed guideline is being issued which should be followed strictly.
The present Appeal pertains to Assessment year 200405. The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that Tribunal was not justified in not accepting the reworking of the book profits by the Assessing Officer as per the provisions of Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior permission in writing from the publisher.
The petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent in not permitting the petitioner to correct the error in mentioning the Permanent Account Number (PAN for short) of one of the agencies to whom the petitioner had made multiple payments during the relevant financial period for which deduction of tax at source was necessary.
