It is to be noted here that the claim made by the assessee under section 158-A will not however preclude the Assessing Officer from making an order disposing of the relevant case without awaiting the final decision on the question of law in other case. When the decision on the question of law becomes final, it shall be applied to the relevant case and the Assessing Officer and the appellate authority shall amend the order earlier passed, if necessary in view of the final decision on the question of law in the other case.
The above ruling lays down that restriction under section 80-IA(9) affects the allowability of total deduction from the profits of the eligible undertaking/unit and not the computation of deduction under various provisions under heading „C? of Chapte
The above ruling provides that tax holiday under section 10A would be available to a foreign office, i.e. a branch carrying on-site software development only if it is a liaison office. An independent branch carrying out full -fledged marketing operat
The principles regarding taxability of income from offshore supplies under a turnkey contract undertaken by a foreign company in India have been laid down by the Supreme Court in Ishikawajma-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. The above decision of the Delh
Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (HC) held that the application made by the taxpayer before the DRP seeking its consent to approach the Assessing Officer (AO), requesting him to finalise the draft assessment order passed under Section 144C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 so as to enable it to file an appeal before the CIT(A), does not tantamount to withdrawal of the DRP application. The HC further held that the case ought to have been considered on merit even in case the DRP was of the opinion that it did not have the requisite powers under the provisions of the Act to entertain the application of the taxpayer.
The present writ petitions are disposed of holding that the respondents are not entitled to levy service tax on the petitioners upto 17.4.2006, in respect of the services availed by them, as it is clear that Section 66A had been inserted in the Finance Act, 1994, by way of an amendment, by the Finance Act, 2006, only with effect from 18.4.2006, enabling the authorities concerned to levy service tax on the recipients of the taxable service.
Where it has not been established before the Court that there has been any failure on the part of the Commissioner(Appeals) or the Tribunal to take into consideration relevant and germane circumstances; consequently, it would not be appropriate or proper for this Court to substitute its own conclusion of fact for a conclusion which has been arrived at by the Tribunal.
While dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue, it was noted by the Tribunal that nothing had been brought on record, by the Assessing Officer, to suggest that the expenditure was not incurred for the business purpose of the assessee. In the opinion of the Tribunal, if somebody, other than the assessee, benefited from the expenditure incurred by it, that woul
In this writ petition there is a challenge to section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994 inasmuch as it purports to levy service tax on the renting of immovable property to be used for commercial / business purposes. This provision has been recently amended by the Finance Act, 2010 with retrospective effect from 1-6-2007.
Applications for stay should not be disposed of in a routine manner unmindful of the consequences flowing from the order requiring the assessee to deposit full or part of the demand; Three aspects to be focused while dealing with the applications for dispensing of pre-deposit are: (a) prima facie case, (b) balance of convenience, and (c) irreparable loss;
