Delhi High Court grants a review petition challenging the handling of a petitioner’s document request by the Customs Commissioner. Learn more in this article.
Merely because the loan processing charges though paid upfront but amortized over a period of five years, solely to be in consonance with the mercantile system of accounting, deduction of the entire charges in lump sum in the year in which the same were paid could not be denied to assessee.
Delhi High Court held that the notice under Section 274 of the Income Tax Act should have been issued before the period of limitation as prescribed under section 275(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
Delhi High Court held that it is settled legal position that re-assessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act cannot be triggered on the aspects which AO has already formed an opinion. Accordingly, notice issued u/s 148 set aside.
Explore the Delhi High Court’s view on whether the IBC 2016 Code supersedes Income Tax Act 1961 when inconsistencies arise. Detailed analysis and insights.
Mr Sujeet Singh Hussain, in whose name M/s Madhu Enterprises was registered, had stated that he was working as a security guard in the office of present applicants, who got his signatures for opening the bank account and fraudulently got the firm registered in his name as well as other employees.
Delhi High Court held the reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act as liable to be set aside as AO failed to demonstrate that explanation given by the assessee was deficient.
Compensation received for non-carrying of business was capital in nature as the operation of non- compete agreement was for 10 years and for the period in which the non-compete agreement was to operate, assessee’s source of income had been clamped.
Delhi High Court held that initiation of proceedings under section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) without issuance of show cause notice or opportunity notice is against the principle of natural justice and hence untenable-in-law.
Delhi High Court’s decision in Bid Services Division (Mauritius) Ltd. Vs DCIT: Reassessment proceedings suspended pending AAR decision.
