Requirement of the formation of the opinion as to the special audit being in the interest of the Revenue continues to apply before and after the amendment. Nevertheless, the basic essential requirements of exercising the powers have been substantially widened by the legislature by way of such amendment.
Hon’ble Bombay High Court (HC) held that the transfer pricing officer (TPO) cannot suo-motu assume jurisdiction to determine the arm’s length price (ALP) of specified domestic transactions (SDT) not referred to him.
Precilion Holdings Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Conclusion: AO was not permitted to reopen assessment merely because in the later year, he took a different view on the basis of similar material available at the time of original scrutiny assessment as there was no failure on the part of assessee to disclose truly and […]
A.T.E. Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) In this case, admittedly, the payments have been made beyond the due date as prescribed in the relevant Act, under which the aforesaid payments have been made. However, it is also undisputed that the payments have been made before the due date for fling the return of […]
Pr. CIT Vs Vernan Pvt. Trust (Bombay High Court) Whether the Assessee is engaged in the business of buying and selling of shares or is a mere investor, would depend on the range of factors. In the present case, the Tribunal has noted the relevant facts and analyzed such facts in proper perspective. To reiterate, […]
The channel of movement of the fund, the source of the fund, purpose of investment and the ultimate destination of the fund, were all part of the record during the assessment proceedings. There is nothing in the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer to suggest that, such investment is bogus.
CIT Vs Kalpana Hansraj (Bombay High Court) Perusal of sub-section (1) of Section 54 of the Act would show that the exemption would be available to an assesse being an individual or Hindu Undivided Family where the capital gain arises from the transfer of a long-term capital asset, not being a residential house provided the remaining conditions […]
Saurabh Suryakant Mehta Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) In the present case, the Assessing Officer had examined the material collected by the Sales Tax Department, prima facie suggesting that the assessee had indulged into bogus billing activities without actually carrying out the purchase and sale of the commodity. It is on this basis that the […]
Pr. CIT Vs Tops Security Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Section 43B does not contemplate liability to pay service tax before actual receipt of the funds in the account of the assessee. Hence the liability to pay service tax into the Treasury will arise only upon the assessee receiving the funds and not otherwise. Thus the […]
Meghraj Moolchand Burad Vs Directorate General of GST (Intelligence) (Bombay High Court) The learned counsel appearing for the Investigating Agency has produced on record a letter dated 26.11.2018 addressed by Advocate on record of the applicant to the DGGI, Pune informing him that, the present matter was on board before this Court on 24.11.2018 at […]
