The assessee has written off the assets which were not found/traceable and as the assets were scattered over different areas, the entire exercise of listing of such fixed assets got crystallized during the year and hence, the booking of the expenditure under head prior period expenses of fixed assets, merits to be allowed in the hands of the assessee.
Lalita Aggarwal Vs PCIT (Delhi High Court) In view of the Covid-19 Pandemic, the Department shall act sympathetically in accordance with law and hence they will modify the attachment of the bank account of the pensioner, if any and to permit withdrawal of the amounts deposited as pension in the State Bank of India and […]
As per section 41(1), there should be an allowance or deduction claimed by the assessee in any assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability incurred by the assessee. Then, subsequently, during any previous year, if the creditor remits or waives any such liability, then the assessee is liable to pay tax under Section 41 of the IT Act.
Spentex Industries Ltd. Vs Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP (Delhi High Court) In the given case, the plaintiff is seeking the main relief to pass a decree of declaration, declaring that the Letter of Engagement as well as arbitration clause being Article 16 of the Letter of Engagement is null and void, inoperative and […]
The issue under consideration is whether set off of the ‘unabsorbed depreciation’ can be allowed irrespective of continuity of the business in next year?
The issue under consideration is that whether the expenditure incurred for CSR will also be qualified for deduction under section 80G?
Existence of reasons for escapement of income are sine qua non to embark upon the assessment or reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. Change or no change of opinion, as argued by the ld. DR, are the factors to be considered after fulfilling the jurisdictional condition of there being an escapement of income, in the absence of which no assessment or reassessment can be made u/s 147.
The issue under consideration is whether the services, the modeling, rendered by Ms. Katrina Kaif in this case constitutes professional service and the fee paid to her for modeling with the purpose of marketing of the camera products of the assessee liable for TDS u/s 194J?
The issue under consideration is that whether the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of interest received amounting to Rs.11,10,810/- and other income amounting to Rs. 6,36,746/- is correct or not?
The assessee challenged the jurisdiction as the Assessing Officer has not given any separate satisfaction for the assessee and only a mechanical satisfaction was recorded.
