Follow Us:

All High Courts

Reopening without disposing Assessee’s objections, not valid

March 11, 2016 2350 Views 0 comment Print

Bombay High Court held In the case of M/s. Bayer Material Science Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT that the draft Assessment order was passed on 30th March, 2015 without having disposed of the Assessee’s objections to the reasons recorded in support of the impugned notice.

S. 40(a)(iii): No specified period for TDS deposit in claiming salary expenses

March 11, 2016 9526 Views 0 comment Print

Delhi High Court held In the case of ANZ Grindlays Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT that absence of a provision similar to sec. 40(a) (i) does not mean that the Assessee would also be disentitled to claim deduction on account of salaries in the year to which such expenses pertained even though

A person suspected of an offence cannot be forced to undergo Narco-analysis, BEAP and polygraph tests without his consent

March 8, 2016 2394 Views 0 comment Print

The scientific question that emanates for consideration in this writ petition is legal permissibility of Narco analysis, polygraph test (lie-detector test) and BEAP (Brain Electrical Activation Profile) test to be conducted against the will and without consent of a person suspected of an offence, subjected to either of the test(s).

Petitioners/dealers carrying-on their business in railway area are liable to pay entry tax under the Chhattisgarh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976.

March 4, 2016 579 Views 0 comment Print

Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board  1. The important question of law that emanates for consideration is whether the Entry Tax under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 can be levied upon the goods brought into railway area where the petitioners are carryingon […]

Courts should not make adverse remarks agianst party/litigant unless really necessary for just decision of case and opportunity of hearing should be afforded before making such remarks

March 4, 2016 3207 Views 0 comment Print

Seeking expunction of certain offending/objectionable remarks in the judgment delivered on 09.12.2014 by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) in Sessions Trial No. 21/2014 in the matter of State of Chhattisgarh v. Gangaram Bareth and others, the petitioner herein has filed this writ petition on the following factual backdrop:-

Revision based on wrong premise of CIT not sustainable

March 4, 2016 1207 Views 0 comment Print

Once it is clear that the assessee had correctly debited the profit and loss account for the loss arising out of the transfer of investment division, there remains no difficulty in realizing that the CIT proceeded on a wrong premise which was responsible for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 263 which he would not have done if he had realized the correct position.

Expenses not generating capital asset is revenue in nature

February 26, 2016 2848 Views 0 comment Print

In the present case, the capital assets has never come into existence and accordingly ITAT has allowed travelling expenses or ore testing charges only as revenue expenditure. The travelling expenses or manganese ore testing charges pertaining to the existing mine allowed by the ITAT

Reopening on incoherent reasons not valid u/s 147

February 26, 2016 1981 Views 0 comment Print

A plain reading of reasons, gives rise to doubts whether some lines have gone missing or some punctuation marks have been left out. Grammatically also the reasons recorded make little sense. It is well settled that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment have to speak for themselves.

Sec. 271B No penalty on club having bonafide belief of mutuality

February 26, 2016 2149 Views 0 comment Print

It is clear that the assessee was under the bonafide belief that the provisions of Section 44AB were not applicable to a Club, while supplying beverages, liquor etc., to its members as it was not engaged in any business

Lok Aayog has no jurisdiction and authority to pass orders directing departmental enquiry and consequent recovery, it can only make recommendations for such an action.

February 26, 2016 915 Views 0 comment Print

1. The superb question of law that falls for consideration in this writ petition is, whether the Chhattisgarh Lok Aayog has jurisdiction and authority to pass an order directing the State Government and / or its authorities to hold departmental enquiry mandatorily and to recover the amount in exercise of its advisory jurisdiction under sub-section (1) […]

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031