Bombay High Court in the case of Mrs. Rajani B. Somkuwar Versus Ms.Sarita Somkuwar & Anr. passed an order on 19th June, 2020 while disposing a writ petition filed by a 70-year-old mother against her daughter seeking her eviction from the flat they reside in alleging that she tortured her both mentally and physically.
Despite the repeated appraisal of arbitral clauses in contracts between parties by both the legislature and judiciary as the key to arbitration becoming the preferred mode for commercial dispute resolution as long as such clauses remain impartial, several Government organizations and Public Sector Undertakings have one-sided clauses for dispute resolution in their agreements. The Bombay High Court also took note of the same.
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)?
Collector of Stamps committed a manifest error in not at all adverting to the fact that the Charity Commissioner had determined the value of the trust property by following requisite process to ensure the best value, and determining the market value of the trust property on the sole premise that there was a vast difference in the value determined by the Deputy Director and the value at which the Charity Commissioner accorded sanction for sale.Therefore, the court remitted back the matter to the Collector of Stamps for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of hearing to assessee.
whether the act of the Income Tax Officers of collecting and keeping the Narcotic Drug found during search in safe custody constitutes a seizure?
Since Zuari had obtained a long term captive source of the raw material by purchase of right from Texmaco for mining of limestone by operating the cement plant, therefore, the raw material was required to be won, gotten and brought to the surface and as such, could not be said to be revenue expenditure.
As per section 41(1), there should be an allowance or deduction claimed by the assessee in any assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability incurred by the assessee. Then, subsequently, during any previous year, if the creditor remits or waives any such liability, then the assessee is liable to pay tax under Section 41 of the IT Act.
he members of the petitioner Association may not be an exception. Since the Government has graciously permitted the license holders to pay the license fees at pre-revised rate, on account of exigency of the situation, an extension of time till 1st June, 2020 to pay the license fees at pre-revised rates in terms of the Circular dated 13th April, 2020, would not cause any serious prejudice to the State. Thus, the time stipulated by the Circular dated 13th April, 2020, to pay the license fees at pre-revised rate stands extended till 1st June, 2020.
Since assessee had not disclosed any black money or asset in the income tax proceedings going against him rather he had denied the same, therefore, while respondents may proceed pursuant to the impugned notices dated December 20, 2017 to assessee under Section 10(1) of the Black Money Act calling upon them to produce the details sought for in connection with the assessment for the assessment year 2017-18 under the Black Money Act however, no coercive measures might be taken against assessee if the occasion so arose.
Align Components Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) It is clarifed that since the State of Maharashtra has partially lifted the lock down recently in certain industrial areas in the State of Maharashtra, the workers would be expected to report for duties as per the shift schedules subject to adequate protection, from […]
