The petitioner is an Indian citizen. He is a businessman and says that he plays international cricket representing India. He also plays domestic cricket. He participated in what is known as Indian Premier League (IPL). He was one of the players chosen by the franchisee Knight Riders Sports Private Limited. This franchisee is owner of one team in the IPL, namely, Kolkata Knight Riders. An agreement of 21 st April, 2008 with the petitioner was executed by this franchisee.
SEBI, vide circular dated December 01, 2015, had introduced system-driven disclosures in securities market detailing the procedure to be adopted for its implementation with effect from January 01, 2016. The procedure was further streamlined vide SEBI circular dated December 21, 2016.
Company shall give preference to the local area and areas around it where it operates, for spending the amount earmarked for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities.
Principal CIT vs. Grasim Industries Ltd (Bombay High Court) We understand that while appointing panel Advocates for the Revenue, the requirement of having practiced for some number of years is not insisted upon in case a person has domain expertise, such as retired Officers of Revenue. If this indeed be the practice, it would, in […]
It is one of the most time-honoured and cardinal rule of administration of justice that a party (adversary) should be heard by any Court or Tribunal in the manner he has approached the Court/Tribunal and that he should never be preferred or selected over other litigants/adversaries from the long pending queue unless and until, we repeat, unless and until there are strong compelling and justifiable reasons for bestowing a preferential treatment to a party for hearing him on priority and out of turn basis.
Entitlement for duty free import of sector specific inputs which were available in Chapter 1B of FTP 2009-14 have been re-inserted in Chapter 1 of FTP 2015-20 w.e.f. 01.04.2015. for Handlooms, Handicrafts, Leather and Footwear, Marine Sector, Sports Goods and Toys.
One should not consider and reject an explanation as concocted and contrived by applying prudent man’s behaviour test. Principle of preponderance of probability as a test is to be applied and is sufficient to discharge onus.
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 that the working sheet may not have been enclosed does not amount to a failure by the Assessee to make a full and true disclosure of all material facts. Consequently, the Court is satisfied that the second reason for re-opening is also unsustainable in law.
Major Disaster Recovery Drill scheduled for 2nd June 2018, between 9 AM to 3 PM. Kindly note that GST System services will not be available during this time. Disaster Recovery Drill scheduled for 2nd June 2018, between 9 AM to 3 PM. Kindly note that GST System services will not be available during this time. GSTN […]
DCIT Vs M/s DSM Sinochem Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Chandigarh) In this case since there was no reason at all for reopening the case on the issue of treatment of royalty expenses ,since the same had already been decided in favour of the assessee by the ITAT, before the recording of reasons for reopening the present case. […]
