Har Krishan Vs President Secretariatt (Delhi High Court) This Court is of the opinion that whenever information is sought under the RTI Act, disclosure of an interest in the information sought would be necessary to establish the bonafides of the applicant. Non-disclosure of the same could result in injustice to several other affected persons, whose […]
Lalitaben Govindbhai Patel Vs Gujarat State Financial Corporation (Gujarat High Court) The present litigation on the board of this Court in the form of Special Civil Application No.11116 of 2008 and Letters Patent Appeal No.2480 of 2010 has arisen on account of sheer misconception on the part of the writ petitioners and writ appellants in […]
G.E. Govindaraj Vs Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Madras High Court) It is in the public domain that large scale and wider allegation of corrupt activities, more specifically, in Department like Commercial Tax Department, are prevailing and, people are lamenting about the corrupt activities in collusion with the traders at large in the State. However, no measures […]
Principal Officer, M/s. Vedanta Limited Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) As far as the present Writ Petition is concerned, admittedly, the notice under Section 148 was issued in a wrong name. However, close reading of the name of the Company would reveal that the first word ‘Sesa’ is not alien to the petitioner Company and […]
P. Amarnath Reddy Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) It is pertinent to note that in the Assessment Order, M/s.Shoetek Agencies is the assessee’s proprietary concern and is engaged in the business of leather and leather products. In the Assessment Order, though the assessee contended that Mrs. Swetha Reddy went aboard in the capacity of Marketing […]
PCIT Vs SRM Systems and Software P. Ltd. (Madras High Court) The assessee disclosed share capital advance to the tune of Rs.6,17,81,000/- and they were directed to furnish names and addresses of the persons, who contributed the advance share capital. The assessee, by reply dated 15.12.2010, stated that the advance towards share capital is Rs.5,65,96,723/- however, […]
Ashok Kumar B. Chowatia Vs JCIT (TDS) (Madras High Court) To the extent tax was deducted by the second respondent and not remitted by the second respondent to the Income Tax Department, recovery can be only directed against the second respondent as the second respondent is the assessee in default. The petitioner cannot be made […]
CIT Vs Rishabh Infopark Pvt. Ltd. (Madras High Court) The only issue in the appeals of the Revenue is that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in holding that the lease rent income received from letting out modules of Software Technology park to various lessees would constitute income from business and eligible for deduction under […]
PCIT Vs Superior Films Private Limited (Delhi High Court) When the assessee has filed a return u/s 139 of the Act or in response to sections 142(1) or 148 of the I.T.Act and when an assessment order u/s 143(3) or u /s 147 of the Act has already been passed then the assessee enjoys statutory […]
CIT Vs HTC Global Services India Pvt. Ltd. (Madras High Court) Appellate Tribunal was not correct in confirming to reduce the expenses relating to telecommunication and travel expenses in foreign currency from the total turnover for computing deduction under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act. Further Appellate Tribunal was not right in excluding the […]
