HC directs to make appropriate changes in the portal so as to enable the petitioner to comply with the statutory requirements for the period prior to 09.03.2018 also, within ten days
Academy of Medical Sciences Vs. CIT (Kerala High Court) Background Chapter XVII-B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 deals with deduction and collection of tax at source [with-holding tax]. This chapter is sub survient to section 4 i.e. charging section of the Act. Section 40(a)(ia) deals with dis-allowance of a portion of expenditure[ which is […]
Ravindra Arora Vs ACIT (Rajasthan High Court) Tribunal refused to decide the fresh issue with regard to deemed dividend simply because it was raised at the appellate stage was not justified as legal issue can be raised in appeal at any point of time. Hence, order passed by the Tribunal was quashed and set aside […]
Seeking refund of TDS already paid by the petitioner to the Department running to the tune of Rs. 54,04,14,180/- and contending that refund for the year 2016-17 is not being granted this writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking refund of the TDS deposited.
This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges an order dated 2nd December, 2016 passed by the Settlement Commission (Commission) under Section 245 D(6B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
In a interim order Delhi High Court has held in the case of Milind Aggarwal & Ors Vs. The Institute Of Chartered Accountants Of India that ICAI shall produce the relevant official records pertaining to the receipt and compilation of the documents, the moderation procedure adopted leading to the final declaration of results which would […]
In the absence of any communication on the request made by the petitioner, according to me, the assessing authority should not have completed the assessments, without a further notice to the petitioner.
The issue raised in all these Appeals/Writ Petitions are with respect to the liability of chit transactions, to service tax as arising from the Finance Act, 1994. The issue arises during three periods, in so far as the amendments made to the Finance Act, 1994
In our considered opinion, the production is the same, manufacturing and the process is the same and excise duty is liable on the manufacturing, merely because in the certificate there is no mention of MS Special, the taxing statute will not be different. In view thereof, the view taken by the Tribunal is just and proper and no interference is required.
The Revenue is in appeal against the common order of the Tribunal for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The issue relates to acceptance of loans and deposits other than by way of Cheque or Draft, in violation of Section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for brevity the Act] and the resultant penalty levied under Section 271D, totaling the amounts so accepted.
