Follow Us:

All High Courts

Provisions u/s 22 of SICA not applicable to arbitration proceedings

June 9, 2009 1621 Views 0 comment Print

The First Respondent had filed a claim petition against the Petitioners before the arbitrator seeking a sum of over Rs.57 lakhs stated to be due under a hire-purchase agreement. The Petitioners raised a specific plea before the arbitrator that the claim petition was not maintainable as the first Petitioner had been declared a sick industrial company by the BIFR and that section 22 of SICA placed an embargo on the continuation of the arbitral proceedings against them.

Department need not provide reason for search U/s. 132

June 5, 2009 960 Views 0 comment Print

Search & seizure action u/s 132 was undertaken at the assessee’s premises. Thereafter an order of provisional attachment u/s 281B was passed. The assessee filed a writ petition challenging the validity of the search and the provisional attachment. HELD dismissing the Petition: (1) Search action u/s 132 can be initiated only if the designated authority forms a reasonable belief

Whether the Petitioner is entitled to waiver of interest under Section 220(2A)?

May 29, 2009 4326 Views 0 comment Print

This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks the issuance of a writ to waive the interest levied under Section 220 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act for short) pertaining to three consecutive years in respect of which the original Demand had already been paid. The Petitioner has contended that for the Assessment Years 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83, the Revenue has raised a demand of Rupees 2,84,546/-, Rupees 6,95,479/- and Rupees 15,23,079/- respectively in regard whereof Demand Notices were served on 30.03.1983, 27.04.1983 and 27.04.1983 respectively.

IT Department cannot access data of other clients of a CA if search related to one particular client

May 27, 2009 4980 Views 0 comment Print

If apparently reliable material could not be directly used against an assessee solely because it was not collected during a Search of that assessee, a fortiori, material palpably concerning a third party with no connection with the raided party must be ignored.

Section 164 attracted when shares of beneficiaries are unknown

May 25, 2009 1844 Views 0 comment Print

Section 164 gets attracted only when the shares of the beneficiaries are unknown, which is manifest from the marginal heading of that section itself; so long as the trust deed gives the details of the beneficiaries and the description of the person who is to be benefited, the beneficiaries cannot be said to be uncertain, merely because wife/children cannot be known until the marriage and begetting of children by the stated beneficiaries.

Expression Marketing under section 80P(2)(a)(iii) includes processing

May 22, 2009 1222 Views 0 comment Print

According to plain reading of Section 80P(2)(a)(iii) , if a Cooperative Society earns income from marketing of the agricultural produce grown by its members, the deduction in respect of the profits and gains of business which are attributable to that marketing activity would be available under this provision. The main point that needs deliberation is the scope and ambit of the expression “marketing ” occurring in sub -clause (iii) of Section 80P(2)(a) of the 1961 Act.

Expenses reimbursed cannot be excluded from the amount defined in section 44BB(2)

May 22, 2009 619 Views 0 comment Print

Whether, the ITAT has erred in law in holding that reimbursement of expenses on account of catering charges and fuel etc. to the assessee were not part of the gross receipts for the purposes of Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 5. Before further discussion, we think it just and proper to quote the provisions contained

CESTAT is correct in allowing benefit of penalty upto 25% of duty amount

May 20, 2009 1005 Views 0 comment Print

The argument of the Revenue that the judgement in Dharmendra Textile Processor’s case (supra) would apply and penalty equal to the amount of duty of excise assessed by the Assessing Authority is to be paid. We are afraid that such an argument would not be available because judgement in Dharmendra Textile Processor’s case (supra) dealt with Section 11 AC of the Act and has concluded the mandatory nature of the penalty contemplated by the proviso . In para 26, reference has been made to the Union Budget of 1996-97, when Section 11 AC of the Act was introduced.

Principle of mutuality where the income of the mutual concern is the contributions received from its contributors

May 17, 2009 2653 Views 0 comment Print

8. Having heard the learned counsel Mr C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate for the assessee-company and Ms Prem Lata Bansal for the Revenue we are of the view that the judgment deserves to be sustained. The principle of mutuality as enunciated by the Courts in various cases is applicable to a situation where the income of the mutual concern is the contributions received from its contributors

High Court Interference would be justified only if it appears that the conclusions made by ITAT palpably perverse

May 17, 2009 1219 Views 0 comment Print

4. At the outset, we need to underscore that so far as findings of fact are concerned interference of the High Court would be justified only if it appears to it that the conclusions arrived at by the ITAT are palpably perverse. 5. The entitlement of sundry parties to the receipt of commission essentially entails a determination

Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031