Pr. CIT Vs M/s RST India Ltd. (Bombay High Court) It is not disputed that upon termination of the contract, the assessee’s entire business of soliciting freight on behalf of the US based company came to be terminated. It may be that assessee had, other business. Insofar as the question of taxing the receipts arising […]
Pr. CIT Vs State Bank of India (Bombay High Court) The Assessing Officer has been given no discretion in the matter of granting interest. The amount of interest has to be paid to an assessee in terms of Section 244A of the Act. The only limitation provided therein under Section 244A of the Act is […]
Pr. CIT Vs Smt. Hemlata S Shetty (Bombay High Court) Amount received by a partner on his retirement and the partnership firm is not subjected to tax in the retiring partner’s hands in view of Section 45(4) of the Act. The liability, if any, to pay the tax is on the partnership firm in view […]
Advance tax, self assessed tax and TDS paid prior to filing of declaration, should not be adjusted towards discharge of assessees liability to pay tax, surcharge and penalty under the scheme of Income Tax Declaration Scheme, 2016 in absence of any specific provision in the scheme, granting benefit of the self assessed tax or advance tax under the Act.
The so-called bank guarantee commission was not in the nature of commission paid to an agent but it was in the nature of bank charges for providing one of the banking services. The requirement of section 194H of the Act, therefore, would not arise.
Mohanlal Champalal Jain Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) Assessing Officer has proceeded on wrong premise that even when called upon to state why the petitioner had not filed return of income, he had not responded to the said query. The petitioner did communicate to the Department that he had no taxable income and therefore, there […]
Bombay High Court in the writ filed by the Chamber of Tax Consultants has held that CBDT’s action plan for granting incentives to CIT(A) on account of enchantment of assessment, levy of penalty, strengthening the order of AO, has been struck down retrospectively.
Impugned notice of reopening of assessment was issued on a dead person. There are several judgments of different High Courts holding that the notice or reopening of assessment is invalid in law. Suffice it to say, as per the settled law, notice for reopening of assessment against a dead person is invalid.
While giving full effect to the deeming fiction contained under section 50C of the Act for the purpose of computation of the capital gain under section 48, for which section 50C is specifically enacted, the automatic fallout thereof would be that the computation of the assessee’s capital gain and consequently the computation of exemption under section 54EC, shall have to be worked out on the basis of substituted deemed sale consideration of transfer of capital asset in terms of section 50C of the Act.
CIT Vs Asian Heart Institute and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) In the present case, it has been recorded that the doctors were entitled to admit, investigate and provide treatment to the patients and that the doctors would be responsible for their clinical care. The doctors were responsible for supervising the sub-ordinate staff […]
