Sri. P.P.Sharafuddin Vs. ITO (ITAT Cochin) The amount of Rs. 14 lakh was seized by the police from the assessee on 03.03.2008. At the time of seizure, the assessee did not mention that the amount seized belongs to his uncle. Because of the suspicious behavior and lack of explanation on the part of the assessee, […]
The petitioner had questioned and challenged the validity of office order dated 11th May, 2017 passed by the Secretary, Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (hereinafter referred to as Maha RERA for short). In the impugned order the Maha RERA observed that since the term ‘Co promoter’ is not defined in the Act,Rules or Regulations, it […]
Shri R K Jain Vs. Indian Bank Association (IBA) (Central Information Commission) Taking into account that the IBA performs functions as State agency and its majority control vests in Government of India appointed Managing Directors of Public Sector Banks, the IBA qualifies to be a public authority under the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission, therefore, directs the IBA […]
A reassessment order cannot be passed without compliance with the mandatory requirement of notice u/s 143(2) being issued as the requirement of issuance of such notice is a jurisdictional one and section 292BB cannot cure jurisdictional error.
ACIT (Exemptions) Vs. Andhra Cricket Association (ITAT Vishakhapatnam) The assessee is receiving grants from BCCI partly as reimbursements for various tournaments conducted by the assessee. The assessee has already constructed a stadium at Visakhapatnam suitable for conducting ‘test matches‘. During the year under consideration, the assessee has also commenced construction of stadiums at various places […]
SC held that appellants were entitled to refund of Education Cess and Higher Education Cess which was paid along with excise duty once the excise duty itself was exempted from levy
Though the amount was credited to her account in the books of accounts of the assessee, the payment was not made to her and before making the payment and filing the return of income, the assessee had obtained the form 15G and forwarded to the Ld. CIT. Since the recipient was not having taxable income, obtaining form 15G before making the payment would be sufficient compliance and hence, we hold that the addition u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act does not attract.
George Alexander Vs ACIT (ITAT Cochin) The Assessing Officer in para 6 of the assessment order had catalogued the unexplained deposits in various bank accounts. While working out the unexplained deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee, the Assessing Officer had given due credit to the income declared by the assessee in the return of […]
CIT(A) has been given power u/s. 251 of the Act to confirm the order of AO reduce, enhance or annul assessment order under the provision of Act but there is no power available to Ld. CIT(A) to give direction to AO for reopening the case of other years.
Tribunal was not justified in holding that the failure to initiate penalty proceedings in the course of the assessment did not render the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Commissioner had the jurisdiction to revise such an order.
