Where the document was executed by the parties prior to the revision of the fair value, the valuation need only be done in accordance with the fair value existing as on the date of execution of the document and the stamp duty for the purpose of registration need be calculated accordingly.
Mohit Vijay Vs Union Of India (Rajasthan High Court) In the present case, petitioner filed bail application u/s 439 CrPC for the offense of wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit under Section 132(1)(b)(c)(f)(j) and (I) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. High Court States that, the grant or denial is regulated, to […]
Tribunal’s power and jurisdiction of hearing an appeal against an order of provisional release was coequal with the power exercised by the adjudicating authority. Tribunal had the power to direct provisional release of gold jewellery, seized as well as to fix the terms.
PCIT Vs Junjab National Bank (Delhi High Court) Merely because additions made by the Assessing Officer have been partially upheld by the CIT (A), would not confer the ground to initiate proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act of imposition of penalty, unless it is found that there is concealment of material facts, or furnishing […]
The issue under consideration is whether A.O. is correct in issuing Notice under section 147 for re-opening of assessment irrespective of the fact that the material on which he relied is already present in front of him at the time of assessment u/s 143(3)?
Rule 27 embodies a fundamental principal that a Respondent who may not have been aggrieved by the final order of the Lower Authority or the Court, and therefore, has not filed an appeal against the same, is entitled to defend such an order before the Appellate forum on all grounds, including the ground which has been held against him by the Lower Authority, though the final order is in its favour.
AO was not justified in reopening of assessment after four years as on an independent application of mind and on thorough consideration of material aspects and legal position,there was no failure on the part of assessee.
Compensation received in respect of non agricultural land which has been exempted from levy of income-tax vide section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act shall also not be taxable under the provisions of income-tax Act, 1961 even if there is no specific provision of exemption for such compensation in the Income-tax Act, 1961
In the given case, the contention of the petitioner is essentially that, why the Appellate Authority deemed it necessary for the petitioners to pay 20% of the total demand, as a condition for stay of the balance 80% of the demand arising from the assessment order during the pendency of the appeal.
Ahilya Devi Wife of Late Birendar Yadav Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court) It is eminent that clause (ii) of sub-Section (1) of Section 45 of the Act places two conditions for release of a person accused of an offence under the Act, on bail, if a Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application, namely; […]
