At the time of registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, which is necessary for claiming exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Act, the Commissioner of Income Tax is not required to look into the activities, where such activities have not or are in the process of its initiation.
Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Indus Cosmeceuticals held that the condition of employing atleast 10 workers as required to be complied with for claiming deduction u/s 80IB cannot be deemed to have complied by employing workers for a small part of year.
In the present case also, there exist no grounds for re opening the assessment after the expiry of 4 years from the relevant assessment year. The notice under section 148 of the said Act is based on re-appreciation of the same material on record.
We are unable to discern any legal flaw in the proviso to Section 85(3) of the Act, that would enable us to hold that the proviso impedes the rights of the petitioner to file an appeal or is in any manner in excess of legislature power or should be read down.
Karnataka High Court rules rental income from sub-lease of office premises as part of business profits eligible for Section 10A deduction.
The Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Yash International Inc. held that the fact that the new firm has almost the same partners and some workers of existing firm shifted to new firm’s unit cannot make the new entity arising as result of splitting up of the existing one.
It is a settled position in law that for reassessment proceedings beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, it is an essential condition that the income chargeable to tax which has allegedly escaped assessment must be occasioned
The respondent-assessee was engaged in the business of manufacture of health care and surgical items and in the returns filed for Assessment Years 2006-07, 2008-09 and 2009-10 had declared taxable income of Rs.26,25,230/-, Rs.94,90,363/- and Rs.32,18,350/- respectively.
Some of the relevant facts are, the assessee company was incorporated on September 19, 2007 under the Companies Act, 1956, to carry on trading activities which primarily included wholesale trading of all kinds of consumer goods durables, articles and products.
When the petitioner had sub contracted the entire work and also obtained the Form 20H certificate from the sub contractor who undertook to discharge the tax liability in respect of the entire work that was sub contracted, the amounts retained by the petitioner, from out of payments made by the awarder of the contract, represented only the profit element that accrued to the petitioner in his capacity as the main contractor.
