The petitioner before this Court is a differently abled person, being visually impaired. She is pursuing Chartered Accountancy Course under the aegis of respondent no.1 – The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘ICAI’).
The argument that the Indian parties should have discharged their TDS obligations u/s 195 despite the presumed request of the assessee is one of convenience or despair and not acceptable because in a practical view of the matter, the Indian payers could not have resisted the assessee’s request given future business prospects and the need to keep the assessee in good humour;
Capital gain arising of long term capital asset, if invested in specified asset, the assessee is not to be charged capital gains and exemption provided under Section 54EC of the Act cannot be denied to the assessee only on account of the fact that deeming fiction is created under Section 50 of the Act.
(i) Whether Central Bureau of Investigation, popularly called CBI, is a constitutionally valid police force empowered to investigate crimes? (ii) Could a police force, empowered to investigate crimes, have been created and constituted by a mere Resolution of Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, in purported exercise of its executive powers?
Whether the Tribunal has power in terms of Rule 24 of the Tribunal Rules to dismiss an appeal before it without considering the merits of the appeal and only on the ground for want of prosecution?
The challenge in this petition is to the Circular dated 6th March, 2013 issued by the 1st respondent. The said circular lays down the procedure of preparation of a panel of Auditors and Auditing firms in accordance with the third proviso to sub-section (1) (a) of Section 81 of the Maharashtra
Proviso to Section 112(1) is applied, then almost all assessees covered by the first proviso to Section 48 would be liable to pay tax @ 10% only and not @ 20% on long-term capital gains. The proviso to Section 112(1) is applicable to units and zero coupon bonds, which are not covered by the first proviso to section 48 of the Act.
Whether expenditure incurred to meet out the need for working funds in which expansion of share capital was undertaken, is capital expenditure even when the purpose for which expenditure was incurred did not result in creation of an asset or benefit due to intervention by an external agency.
Merely because the assessee complies with the statutory procedural requirement of filing the prescribed form and certificate of the Chartered Accountant, cannot absolve the assessee of its liability if the act or attempt in claiming the deduction was not bonafide.
The penalty under section 272B cannot be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. It can be imposed for failure to perform statutory obligation. The imposition of penalty for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially
