Since the assessee’s profit and loss account showed only one item of expenditure which had been booked in the accounts and there was no exempt income earned by the assessee, the question of disallowance under section 14A did not arise.
As you might be aware, every person who is having income more than Rs.2,50,000 Is bound to file his/her return income. This includes the Government Servants also. However, the data of returns filed Indicate that more than 50% of the Government Servants at Chennal are not filing their Income tax returns. I hope, you will agree that as government servants, we should abide by laws and to be role models to the common citizens of our country. If we, Government servants ourselves are violating law by not filing our income tax returns, we don’t have any moral right to blame other sections of society
210 companies (given in Annexure I) that have remained suspended for more than 6 months would be delisted from the platform of the Exchange, with effect from July 4, 2018
Jul 06, 2018 Continuous efforts being made to simplify GST system: Finance Secretary Hasmukh Adhia -Work on to make GST refund process fully automatic FICCI GST Survey: 76% respondents say GST had a positive impact on their business NEW DELHI, 6 July 2018: Finance Secretary Dr. Hasmukh Adhia today said that continuous efforts are being made […]
CBIC amends Rule 125, 129, 130,131 and 132 and renamed ‘Directorate General of Safeguards’ as ‘Directorate General of Anti-profiteering’ under Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 vide Notification No. 29/2018–Central Tax dated 6th July, 2018.
This intra-court appeal is directed against an order dated 28.08.2017, wherein and whereby a learned single Judge of this Court had dismissed a writ petition in which a notice dated 16.08.2017, issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax, under Section 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961, was assailed. To be noted, order of the learned single Judge is a common order in two writ petitions, but this judgment deals with the order in W.P.No.22978 of 2017 alone.
M/s. Indus Best Hospitality & Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs PR. CIT (ITAT Mumbai) We have considered rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found from record that CIT has invoked his power u/s.263 to examine the land development charges paid by the assessee to Smt. Sumitraben Chauhan. From the […]
In the present case, the Commissioner does not speak of absence of a written constitution. The appellant also asserts that the constitution of the Generalate regulates the Houses also, which come under the Generalate. The Tribunal also found that the appellant comes under the exclusive control of the Generalate through the hierarchies as disclosed from the constitution and there could be no separate registration granted to the Convent.
HC held that Before parting, we have to note that we have come across series of orders passed by the same Assistant Commissioner wherein reassessment proceedings are initiated after the period of four years and the reasons supplied and the actions taken are not in consonance with the settled law. We request the learned Standing Counsel to supply compilation of the above referred judgments to the concerned Commissioner.
During an interaction of Director General of Foreign Trade with the major exporters of dual use SCOMET items on 30th May 2018, industry representatives requested that DGFT may consider the issue of SCOMET export authorisations from DGFT (Hqrs) itself to avoid delay in grant of export authorisations
