Notification No. 34/2019- Central Government notifies ‘Telangana State Electricity Regulatory Commission’, Hyderabad, a commission constituted by the State Government of Telangana, in respect of the specified income arising to that board under section 10(46) of Income Tax Act, 1961. MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Revenue) (CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES) Notification No. 34/2019 New Delhi, […]
Notification No. 33/2019- Central Government notifies ‘Mysore Palace Board’, Karnataka, a board constituted by the Government of Karnataka, in respect of the specified income arising to that board under section 10(46) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Also Read- Exemption to Mysore Palace Board- CBDT amends N/No. 33/2019 MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Revenue) (CENTRAL BOARD […]
Mandhana Industries Ltd Vs Pr. CIT (Bombay High Court) On reading the provisions contained in Chapter XIX-A of the Act, a clear picture that emerges is that an assessee can apply for settlement of a case as long as same is pending. Once such an application is filed (and in case of application filed before […]
Pr. CIT Vs Late Shantaben P. Patel (Gujarat High Court) In this case Since assessee had relied on the estimate made by the Registered Valuer for the purpose of supporting its value of the asset, any such situation would be governed by clause (a) of section 55A and AO could not have resorted to clause […]
Provisional list of IPs prepared in accordance with’ Guidelines for Appointment of IPs as Administrators under the SEBI (Appointment of Administrator and Procedure for Refunding to the Investors) Regulations,2018.’
Pr. CIT Vs M/s. Monsanto India Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Tribunal recorded that the Non Compete Agreement was part of the agreement for the sale of the business. Under this Agreement, the Assessee could be seen to have transferred the right to manufacture the product in question. The Tribunal, therefore, was of the opinion that […]
Reassessment order passed without disposal of objections raised by assessee by passing a speaking order by AO was illegal and invalid.
Kohinoor Industrial Premises Co– operative Society Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Undisputedly, the assessee has derived rental income from letting out space in the terrace of the building to mobile companies for installing their mobile tower / antenna. It is also a fact that the assessee has offered such rental income as income from house […]
IBC Code segregates commercial aspects from judicial aspects of an insolvency proceeding and empowers and facilitates the stakeholders and the Adjudicating Authority to take decisions in their respective domain.
ITO Vs M/s. Dinal Diamonds (ITAT Mumbai) We find that in this case the sales have not been doubted. It is settled law that when sales are not doubted, 100% disallowance for bogus purchase cannot be done. The rationale being no sales is possible without actual purchases. This proposition is supported from the Hon’ble jurisdictional […]
