Section 44BB of the Act is a special provision for computing profits and gains in connection with the business of exploration of mineral oils. Its purpose was explained by the Department vide its Circular No. 495 dated September 22, 1987, namely,
The contract of guarantee does not give any rise to principal – agent relationship between the assessee and the bank and, therefore, the consideration received by the bank on account of guarantee commission cannot be reckoned as commission as contemplated under section 194H and accordingly, there was no requirement to deduct TDS on this payment.
Explore the ITAT Delhi’s decision on Anant Concrete Products Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO, highlighting jurisdictional issues in the reassessment process. Learn how the lack of proper jurisdiction impacts the validity of re-assessment.
Respondent was required to consider as to merely because the notified party in the commercial invoice contains an address in Chennai, can the transaction be suspected to be one for sale within the State of Tamil Nadu. In fact, when the Detention Notice was issued on suspicion, there was no tangible material available with the officer to suspect that the imported goods were intended for sale in Tamil Nadu.
An order cannot be revised by the equally situated or equally ranked authority or by any authority who is not authorised under the law. In the instant case the authorised authority is none else but the Commissioner of Income Tax or Principal Commissioner of Income Tax.
The petitioner – a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 – has filed the present petition impugning communications dated 01.08.2014 and 07.12.2015 (hereafter referred to as the impugned communications)
Pankaj Dutta Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) Issuance and service of notice under section 143(2) is mandatory and not procedural. If the notice is not served within the prescribed period, assessment framed would be invalid and such irregularity cannot be treated as curable under section 292BB. FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:- This […]
ITO Vs Tarun Sales (ITAT Delhi) Since no dealer or sub-dealer was appointed either by BSNL or by the assessee, for the purpose of marketing the products and/or service of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., the entire sales were to customers, either directly or through shopkeepers, who rendered services to the customers.
Since the parties in these Writ Petitions are one and the same and the relief sought herein are inter-connected, all these Writ Petitions were taken together and disposed of by this common order.
1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals), XXVIII, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the learned CIT(A)] has grossly erred in denying the exemption to the Appellant under section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
