Cash in hand referred to in Section 2(ea)(vi) of the Act represents only the personal cash of the assessee emanating from his personal balance sheet. It nowhere contemplated the inclusion of cash which is held as business asset.
M/s. Google India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) The present stay petition is filed seeking further extension of the stay of demand. Admittedly there is change of the circumstances from the first stay order, since this Tribunal had disposed of the appeal involving identical issue for earlier years against the assessee. Therefore, the principle […]
CBDT has extended Due date for filing ITRs & Tax Audit Reports under Income Tax Act,1961 from 30.09.2017 to 07.11.2017 for those who were liable to file ITRs by 30.09.17. The Extension was first announced on Twitter at 10.21 PM on 31.10.2017 and later by way of press release on pib.nic.in at 11.35 PM. Further […]
As we all know Extended due date to file Tax Audit Report and related ITR for A.Y. 2017-18 is 31st October 2017, which the Taxpayers and Tax Professionals across the country were demanding to be further extended till 30th November 2017. One of the Major Arguments and reason for asking the extension was additional workload […]
We have created a Poll on our twitter page on 24th October 2017 asking Taxpayer and Tax Professionals across India that do they think that Time Limit for filing IT Return (44AB Audit Cases) must be further extended to 30th November 2017. In response to our poll we have received 3285 Votes and 90% of […]
CBDT and Finance Ministry seems to have their own merrily way as despite request from Taxpayer all around the country they have not bothered to accept their request for extension of due date of Income Tax Returns which are falling due on 31st October 2017 to 30th November 2017.
For Quarter ending on 30th September 2017 due date to file ITC-04 was 25th October 2017 and CBEC has made an announcement to extended such date just 3 Hour before the expiry of due date.
Non-contest in the proceedings under Section 73 cannot be used as a ground or reason to establish and show that requirements of Section 78 are satisfied. The Tribunal after appreciating different aspects, including conduct of the respondent-Corporation has held that penalty should not be levied. The finding is a finding of fact.
As purchase of inventory is continuation of same business activity, the, proviso to section 36(1)(iii)(d) did not get attracted in case assessee having borrowed funds to purchase inventory, therefore, assessee was duly entitled to claim deduction under section 36(1)(iii).
This Demand Draft was sent along with a notice, dated 22.1.2015. The third respondent has received the demand draft, but, unfortunately, misplaced the same. It is not known, as to how, the Revenue Department of the Corporation can be so careless in misplacing the demand draft, especially, when such amount was directed to be paid, pursuant to the Court order.
