Analyze the case of PCIT Vs Indravadan Jain, HUF in the Bombay High Court, where the issue of addition u/s 68 for penny stock transactions was examined. Discover how documentary evidence played a crucial role in the court’s decision.
Gujarat High Court ruling on Section 148A: Notices issued after 01.04.2021 are time-barred. Details of the Keenara Industries Pvt Ltd Vs ITO case provided.
Section 11: Property held for charitable purposes- Attempt to promote the trade, commerce and manufacturers of India without seeking to make profits for its members is charitable purpose -Denial of exemption is held to be not justified. [S. 2(15)] Case Name: Bombay Chamber of Commerce vs ITO (E) (ITAT Mumbai), Mumbai, Appeal No: ITA No. […]
In the landmark judgement the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India allowed the appeal of the South Indian Bank by settling the long drawn battle between the assessee and the department on whether proportionate disallowance of interest paid by the banks is called for under section 14A of the Income Tax Act for investments made in tax free bonds/securities which yield tax free dividend and interest of assesse Banks when assesse had sufficient interest free own fund which were more than the investments made.
Case Name: Teleperformance Global Services Private Limited vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) Written Petition No 950 of 2020 Date of judgment/order: 09.04.2021 Related Assessment Year – 2012-13 Court: Bombay High Court The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has in case of writ petition filed by Teleperformance Global Services Private has held that assessment order passed against […]
