PCIT Vs Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd (Delhi High Court) Learned counsel for the Revenue repeated the submission made before the ITAT viz., that the report of Special Audit should be treated as incriminating evidence. Clearly the report of the Special Auditor, having been commissioned subsequent to the search, and during the assessment proceedings against DSL, […]
One needs to discern the predominant nature of duties of a person to determine, if he is having experience in management. Coming to the role of manager vis-à-vis teaching professional, it may be noted that in general, teaching professionals possess a cogent body of knowledge that they impart to students and sometimes are engaged in […]
The Respondent has computed the interim GST benefit by estimating taxes which were a cost to him in the pre-GST regime. We find that it is a methodology based on estimated or assumed figures which is not accurate and we agree with the methodology adopted by the DGAP while determining profiteering.
Central Government hereby notifies that the Notification No.31/2015-2020 dated 13th November, 2019 and published in the Gazette of India , Extraordinary vide number S.O. 4097(E) dated 13th November, 2019 shall be effective from the date on which Section 88 (b) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 (23 of 2019) is notified by the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance. Government of India. Hence, the Notification No.31/2015-20 dated 13th November, 2019 is not effective till amendment of First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act as specified in the Fifth Schedule to the Finance Act is notified.
1. These regulations may be called the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) (Fifth Amendment) Regulations, 2019. 2. They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
Several mails have been received by the Board from some financial creditors in a class, namely, homebuyers expressing confusion about the manner of voting in the context of resolution plan in the corporate insolvency resolution process of Jaypee Infratech Limited. It appears that there is ‘internal voting’ / ‘pre-polling’ on certain matters which are not in the agenda before the Committee of Creditors.
Baiju A. A. Vs State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court) (i) the assessments in respect of which the period of limitation for re-opening under Section 25 of the KVAT Act was to expire by 31.03.2017 can be re-opened up to 31.03.2018 by virtue of the amendment to the third proviso to Section 25 (1) vide […]
If the A.O. has taken up the issue of determining fair market value of the property in question as on 01/4/1981 without converting the limited scrutiny to comprehensive scrutiny by taking the prior approval of the competent authority then the said order passed by the A.O. will be nullity as beyond his jurisdiction.
Genpact India Private Limited Vs DCIT (Supreme Court) Section 115QA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 stipulates that in case of buy back of shares referred to in the provisions of said Section, the company shall be liable to pay additional income tax at the rate of 20% on the distributed income. Any determination in […]
We are of the view that the company having occupied the property for its own purposes, no notional rent can be added. It may be germane to mention here that this is the only property owned and occupied by the assessee as its registered office. It is not the case of the AO that the assessee company was having some other premises to have its office. A company having been incorporated is legally required to have its registered office irrespective of the fact whether during the year it has carried on any activity or not.
