PRAYER – to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned letter dated 09.07.2013 of the 3rd respondent proposing the visit of the officers of the 1st respondent to petitioner premises
The retrospective clarificatory amendments (vide the Finance Act, 2012) do not seek to override the DTAA. In case of a conflict between the domestic law and the DTAA, DTAA will prevail, in terms of Section 90 of the Act.
Petition under Section 151 of C.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in the W.P. the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of clarification issued vide SI.No.3 of the circular No.967/01/2013-CX dated 01.01.2013 and consequent Letter C.No.490/2012-13 dated 04.01.2013 issued by the Respondent No.2, pending disposal of WP No. 730 of 2013 on•the file of the High Court.
A reading of the provision of section 37(3A) to (3D) indicates that where the expenditure or as the case may be, the aggregate expenditure incurred by an assessee on any one or more of the following; i.e. (i) advertisement, publicity, sales promotion (ii) running and maintenance of air craft and motor cars and (iii) payments made to hotels exceeds Rs. 1 lakh 20 per cent of such excess shall not be allowed as deduction in computing the income chargeable under the head ‘profits and gains of business or profession’.
As held in D. Ananda Basappa’s case (1 supra) by the Karnataka High Court, the expression a residential house in Section 54 (1) of the Act has to be understood in a sense that the building should be of residential nature and a should not be understood to indicate a singular number
HC held that CIT had rightly rejected the application of the petitioner for approval under Section 10 (23C) (iv) of the Act on the ground that the petitioner has not rendered its services directly to the farmers but is rendering its services directly to its clients/agents who are engaged in trading of the certified seeds with profit motive and therefore its activities are not for the ‘advancement of any other object of general public utility’ and hence not for ‘charitable purpose’ in view of second limb of the first proviso to Section 2 (15) of the Act.
Petition under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam, in its I.T.A.No. 477/Vizag/2008, dated. 09-04-20 12, pending ITTA.No. 384/2012 preferred to the High Court against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam in ITA.No. 77/Vizag/2008 dated. 09- 04-2012 for the Assessment Year 2005-2006.
Levy of Service Tax on ‘Consulting Engineering Services’ was introduced with effect from 7-7-1997 while ‘Scientific or Technical Consultancy’ was brought under Service Tax net with effect from 16-7-2001 only. The assessee was not only providing ‘Consulting Engineering Services’ but also ‘Scientific or Technical Consultancy’ i.e. Scientific Research.
This is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The following two questions have been referred to the opinion of this court at the instance of the assessee with reference to the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87.
Section 65(19) of the Act defines business auxiliary service and excludes ‘information technology service’ which is defined in the Explanation to the said section as “any service in relation to designing, developing or maintaining of computer software, or computerised data processing or system networking, or any other service primarily in relation to operation of computer systems.
