Re assessment notice issued under section 148 solely on basis of information received from the Kolkata Investigation Directorate that certain persons, who were based in Kolkata, had incorporated shell companies.
Delhi High Court held that the computer software which are necessary and integral for the working of hardware are eligible for depreciation at the rate of 60% instead of 25%.
Delhi High Court’s judgment in PCIT vs. Optimal Media Solutions Ltd. for AY 2009-10 clarifies that retention by advertising agencies is trade discount, not subject to TDS under section 194H.
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.
