PCIT Vs Akzo Noble India Limited (Calcutta High Court) Issue– Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned ITAT, Kolkata has erred in law in deleting the disallowance of sum of Rs.3.50 Crores and Rs.2.11 Crores for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively on account of slump sale of […]
Learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that the issue of SCN and culmination of the same in the impugned order in the name of amalgamating company is ex facie illegal and liable to be set aside. As issue of notice i.e., SCN and assessment qua a non-existent entity (albeit a juristic person) is a jurisdictional error warranting interference in writ jurisdiction is learned counsel’s say.
It should be kept in mind that the offences under Section 132(1)(b)(c)& (i) of the OGST Act are punishable with a maximum punishment of five years Rigorous Imprisonment. Therefore, investigation ought to be completed within 60 days as per Section 167 Cr.P.C. Of course, Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. permits the investigating agency to keep the investigation open. B
The assessee has not proved that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act does not have any application on the said payment of Rs.21,27,846. Hence, the A.O. was correctly disallowed the expenditure by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).
Rajputana Stainless Limited Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) Facts- A notice alleging clandestine manufacture and clearance of finished goods during the period from 2012-13 to 2015-16 based on various statements recorded under section 14 of Central Excise Act. It included the statement of buyers and some of those buyers denied of having received […]
PCIT Vs Servants of People Society (Delhi High Court) A perusal of the paper book reveals that the assessee/society is running a printing press and publishing a newspaper. The profit so generated is used for charitable purposes and apparently there is no profit motive in the activities of the assessee. As such it cannot be […]
Rama Devi Sabat Vs DCIT (Orissa High Court) Contending that the initiation of the reassessment proceedings was based merely on a change of opinion, the present petition has been filed. A perusal of the reasons mentioned above for reopening of the assessment reveals that there was no new material available with department. It is also […]
KSE Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Project Director, Bangladesh Rural Electrification Board And Anr (Calcutta High Court) In contemporary business, trade and commercial transactions, both domestic and international, significant complexities are involved; for instance spatial distance between counterparties who engage in such commercial transactions. As such, it is often very difficult and challenging to approximately assess […]
Bpip Infra Private Limited Vs ITO (Rajasthan High Court) In these cases petitioners are aggrieved of issuance of the re-assessment notice u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which according to the petitioners are barred by limitation and that the Department before issuing the notice under Section 148 of the Act has not followed the […]
Since no definite view could be taken that the notice was beyond the period of limitation in terms of the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 73 and it depend upon the factual examination and adjudication by the adjudicating authority, therefore, the matter was remitted back to the Central Tax Commissioner.
