Reetesh Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) Bench observed that both the lower authorities had dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte for want of non-appearance during the course of hearing. In view of the request of the ld. AR of the assessee, the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the AO […]
We are of the view that proper service of notice is vital for imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(b). In this regard, we draw reliance in case of CIT vs. Har Parshad (1990) 49 Taxman 168 (P&H).
Every assessee has a right to appeal before the authorities against any addition or disallowance made to the returned income, at the same time, it is least expected that the assessee would comply to the notices issued by the authorities in an appropriate way.
Respondents have grossly failed in their duty in law in not passing the appeal effect orders and issuing refund as per Section 153(5) of the Act and their action of withholding the refund is ex facie contrary to and in contempt of Article 265 and 300A of the Constitution of India.
Scheme for Financial Support for Project Development Expenses of PPP Projects – ‘IIPDF Scheme’ (India Infrastructure Project Development Fund Scheme) Notified on 03.11.2022 The Department of Economic Affairs (DEA), Ministry of Finance, Government of India, notifies Scheme for Financial Support for Project Development Expenses of PPP Projects – India Infrastructure Project Development Fund Scheme (IIPDF Scheme) on […]
In any event, in accordance with the mandate of law, the appeal effect order has to be passed within three months of passing of the appeal order.
Commissioner of Service Tax Vs Surindra Engineering Co. Ltd (Bombay High Court) Sub-section (2) to section 35L was inserted with effect from 6th August 2014, i.e., prior to the passing of the order impugned in the present appeal by the CESTAT. Even otherwise, this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-V Vs. […]
Mankind Pharma Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The issue in the present ground is with respect to the disallowance of sale promotion expenses of Rs.1,06,78,600/- by holding it to be covered by Explanation of Section 37(1) of the Act. We find that Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apex Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has […]
Nagpur Municipal Corporation to ensure that, no feeding of street dogs takes place at any place except at the own place of the dog feeder or in the dog shelter homes or any other authorised place and we also direct him to impose appropriate penalty for any breach of these directions, which penalty may not be more than of Rs.200/- for every breach as per the resolution already passed in this behalf by Nagpur Municipal Corporation.
Shankar Nagesh Mutkiri Vs Reserve Bank of India (Supreme Court of India) Invoking the jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to take steps to regulate or disable unauthorized money lending platforms; to frame guidelines to ensure oversight over digital money lenders and for […]
