The Honble Bombay HC in the above stated case held that when the wordings of law are quite clear then law should be applied in its letter and no space could be made for logical or beneficial or constructive interpretation.
Bombay High Court held that Supply of Reasons Recorded for Making Reassessment is Necessary Otherwise the Income Escaping Assessment shall be Void. The Assessing Officer(AO) is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the AO is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order.
The respondent assessee engaged in the business of real estate consultancy / agency and property management services. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer sought to include the service tax billed by it for rendering services to the service receivers as trading receipts on invocation of Section 145A(ii) of the Act. Besides, […]
Bombay HC in the above cited case held that when the assessee’s volume of purchasing and selling shares is quite high with higher frequency of buying and selling with holding 75 days or less then its prima facie indicate that it is engaged in trading of shares unless assessee provide a sound reasoning that why transactions should not be considered as trading activity.
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the above cited case held that even in mercantile system of accounting an item would be regarded as accrued income only if there is certainty of receiving it and not when it has been waived. Earning of the income, whether actual or notional, has to be seen from the viewpoint of a prudent assessee.
Case Law Details Case Name : CIT Vs. M.s Neon Solutions P. Ltd. (Bombay High Court), IT Appeal No. 2251 & 2360 of 2013, 05.04.2016 Appeal Number : Date of Judgement/Order : Related Assessment Year : Courts : All High Courts (1233) Bombay High Court (292) Download Judgment/Order CA Saurabh Chokhra Brief of the case: 1. The Hon’ble Bombay High […]
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the above cited case held that merely because a part of surplus was invested in mutual funds it cannot mean that it would render the principle of mutuality inapplicable more so when the invested money has to be utilized for the furtherance of association’s objectives
When prejudice results from an order attributable to the Tribunal’s mistake, error or omission, then it is the duty of the Tribunal to set it right. Atonement to the wronged party by the Court or the Tribunal for the wrong committed by it has nothing to do with the concept of inherent power to review.
In the present facts we find that consequent to the vendor not honouring the agreement dated 18th May, 1980, all that the appellant had was a right to seek specific performance which he sought to enforce by filing the suit. The appellant did not have possession of the said land. It is only on the Consent Terms being filed in Court that the appellant got ownership and possession.
In the case of M/s Quality Fabricators and Erectors Vs. The Deputy Director, DGCEI, Zonal Unit Mumbai and Others, it was held that in case of non payment of service tax by the assessee, the notices for recovery cannot be issued to assessee’s debtors unless the liability has been crystallised.
