Get all latest income tax news, act, article, notification, circulars, instructions, slab on Taxguru.in. Check out excel calculators budget 2017 ITR, black money, tax saving tips, deductions, tax audit on income tax.
Income Tax : Explore the differences between Form 16 and Form 16A, their purposes, eligibility, and significance in income tax filing. Understa...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court’s Rajeev Bansal case clarified the validity of reassessment notices for AY 2013-14 to 2018-19 and introduced t...
Income Tax : Learn about the planned overhaul of India’s Income Tax Act 1961, set to simplify and modernize tax laws by 2025, aiming for clar...
Income Tax : Learn how to revise TDS returns online via TRACES, correct errors, and ensure compliance. Get step-by-step guidance and understand...
Income Tax : In the alternate, assessee has also raised a ground that Assessing Officer ought to have allowed the expenditure incurred in culti...
Income Tax : Learn how CRS and FATCA enhance tax transparency, requiring foreign asset disclosure in India. Avoid penalties with complete, accu...
Income Tax : Direct tax collections for FY 2024-25 have risen 21.2% gross, with a 15.41% net growth compared to the previous year, reflecting c...
Income Tax : CBI files chargesheet against Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and four others in a Rs 10 lakh bribery case. Investigation det...
Income Tax : CBDT sets transfer pricing tolerance range at 1% for wholesale trading and 3% for other transactions for AY 2024-25, providing cla...
Income Tax : KSCAA highlights critical issues on India’s Income Tax Portal, impacting timely filings for returns and TDS with glitches, timeo...
Income Tax : In Kavita Samtani vs. DCIT, ITAT Jaipur sets aside additions made under Section 69. The appeal challenges the assessment order for...
Income Tax : Jaipur ITAT rules on Vinaya Sharma's agricultural land sale dispute, determining its taxability under the definition of capital as...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur upheld CIT(A)'s decision to add undisclosed income under Sec 50C in the case of Kavita Samtani Vs DCIT, relating to di...
Income Tax : As per provisions of section 153C of the Act, notice required to be issued to the other person would be a notice under section 153...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur rules in favor of Deepak Kumar Samtani, dismissing penalty under Section 272A(1)(C) due to lack of evidence of non-com...
Income Tax : CBDT grants tax exemption to the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board for AY 2024-25 under Section 10(46A) of the Income Tax...
Income Tax : CBDT sets new monetary limits for waiver of interest on delayed tax payments under Section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, eff...
Income Tax : CBDT issues Notification No. 5/2024 for mandatory electronic filing of Forms 3CEDA and 3C-O under Income Tax Rules, effective from...
Income Tax : CBDT issues Circular No. 14/2024 allowing condonation of delay in filing tax returns for AY 2023-24 under Section 80P, benefiting ...
Income Tax : The CBDT extends the Income Tax Return due date for AY 2024-25 to November 15, 2024, as per Circular No. 13/2024 issued on October...
From the documents on record, it can be seen that part of the penalty was confirmed by the CIT(Appeals). However, with respect to the rest, the same was deleted. The Tribunal concurred with such view of CIT (Appeals). Several additions were struck down in the assessment proceeding itself and were sent for reconsideration. With respect to disallowance of deduction under section 80IA of the Act, the authorities held that the claim cannot be stated to be a wrong claim. Relying on the decision in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P.) Ltd. [2010] 322 ITR 158, such penalty was deleted.
We do not find substance in the submission of the Respondent-Revenue that there is no requirement to offer a personal hearing as the same was not asked for by the Petitioner. This court in the matter of Sahara Hospitality (supra) has held that it is mandatory wherever it is possible to do so on the part of the Revenue to grant a personal hearing before passing an order under Section 127(2) of the Act. Thus merely because the Petitioner had not specifically asked for a personal hearing it will not absolve the revenue of its obligation to ordinarily grant such a hearing.
Given Below is the list of Income Tax Officers transferred by virtue of Annual Transfer of Income Tax Officers from Pune, Thane, Satara, Nashik, Dhule, Kalyan, Palghar, Ahmednagar, Kolhapur, Sangli, Satara, Ratnagiri, Ichalkaranji, Aurangabad, Jalgaon, Nanded, Parbhani, Beed, Panvel Under the Charge of CCIT/ DGIT (Inv.) Pune, Thane and Nashik. Download List in PDF Format […]
An Agreement (DTAA) and Protocol Signed Between India and Malta for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion With Respect to Taxes on Income The Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) and the Protocol between the Republic of India and Malta for the avoidance of double taxation and for the prevention of […]
The recovery of the demand on these three heads has to be stayed in view of a strong prima facie case being made out. The balance due and payable by the assessee would work out to Rs.159.49 crores. The assessee has under cover of its letter dated 28 March 2013 paid an amount of Rs.100 crores under protest.
Tribunal observed that no penalty can be imposed merely because account books of assessee were rejected and that profit was estimated on the basis of fair gross profit ratio. With respect to retention of the portion of the sales tax, the Tribunal stated that no evidence was brought by the Revenue to suggest that assessee had retained a portion of sales tax with it. Assessee filed its explanation which could not be termed as not bona fide. In absence of any corroborative evidence to prove the charge that the portion of sales tax bill was retained by the assessee, penalty could not be imposed.
Referring to R.M. Chidambaram Pillai (supra); Kum. A.B. Shanti (supra); Lokhpat Film Exchange (Cinema) (supra), Tribunal held that there is no separate identity for the partnership firm and that the partner is entitled to use the funds of the firm and that the assessee acted bonafide and that there was a reasonable cause within the meaning of Section 273B of the Act. We do not find any error or legal infirmity in the order of the Tribunal warranting interference. The substantial question of law raised in this appeal is answered in favour of the assessee and the Tax Case (Appeal) stands dismissed. No costs.
In the present case, we notice that that petitioners belonged to the same family or group. They were subjected to common search operation. Their assessments were therefore, under proposal for transfer. A show cause notice was issued to all of them in which the Commissioner called upon them to explain why the cases should not be centralised at Ahmedabad for effective and coordinated investigation. After considering their objections and permitting the oral submissions by the authorised representative, the Commissioner passed the order transferring the cases on the ground that cases were required to be centralised. Since Bhavnagar did not have Central Range Office, they could be transferred at Ahmedabad. Their request that cases be consolidated at Bhavnagar or Mumbai was considered but not accepted. They were instead offered alternative places for transfer of cases within the jurisdiction of Surat, Baroda or Rajkot Office. They did not accept the offer. It was thereupon that the Commissioner proceeded to finalise his proposed transfer of cases from Bhavnagar to Ahmedabad.
The assessee has not come out with the case that in the opening stock, the excise duty was not included. The explanation furnished by the assessee is that since in the subsequent assessment year, the turnover was less than one crore of rupees and as such, the goods were not liable to excise duty, therefore, in the closing stock of the relevant assessment year, the excise duty has not been added, is not legally tenable.
We already have delivered a judgment on 3rd April, 2013 in ITAT No. 20 of 2013, G.A. No. 190 of 2013 (CIT, Kolkata-XI Vs. Crescent Export Syndicates) holding that the views expressed in the case of Merilyn Shipping & Transports (ITA.477/Viz./2008 dated 20.3.2012) were not acceptable.
