In the case of PVS Multiplex (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT Delhi Bench of ITAT held that CIT can pass order u/s 263 where he can hold that AO did not made adequate inquiry. ITAT observed that there is difference between lack of enquiry and Inadequate Inquiry.
In Riviera Home Furnishing vs. Addl. CIT, Hon’ble Delhi High Court while dealing with the interpretation of Section 10B(4) held that the manner of determining such eligible profits has been statutorily defined in sub-section (4) of section 10B of the Act.
In a judgment that is expected to have far reaching ramifications, the Delhi High Court has ruled that a female member of a Hindu Undivided Family can also be the ‘karta’. Falling prey to the patriarchal system, this role of leadership has been traditionally inherited by men of the household.
This was a case where the original assessment was completed under Section 143 (3). In other words there was a complete scrutiny of the accounts and all the affidavits of the donors furnished by the Assessee pursuant to the questionnaires issued to him by the AO. In the absence of any adverse
Delhi High Court held In the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (MSIL) vs. CIT that the transfer pricing adjustment is not expected to be made by deducing from the difference between the ‘excessive’ advertisement
Principal Commissioner of Custom Vs. Riso India (P.) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Duty’ as defined in Section 2(15) of the Customs Act, is wide enough to cover all kinds of duty, including SAD. Hence, as per Section 3(8) of Customs Tariff Act
Delhi High Court held In the case of CIT vs. M/s Refam Management Services (P) Ltd. that under Section 153C the assessment or reassessment of income of a person other than a searched person would proceed in accordance with the provisions of Section 153A.
In the case of Principal Commissioner of Service Tax V/S Tops Security Ltd , it was held that an appellate authority cannot at the appellate stage give the option to an Assessee to pay the reduced penalty within a time that is beyond what is stipulated in the third proviso to Section 78 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994.
In case of CIT vs. Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd Following the Madras High Court in CIT-III Chennai v. PVP Ventures Ltd. (TC(A) No. 1023 of 2005) it was held by Delhi High Court that ESOP could be debited to the profit and loss account of the Assessee.
CIT Vs. Five Vision Promotors Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)- AO made addition on account of share application money u/s 68 which was confirmed by the CIT. On appeal ITAT held that assessee has proved identity, genuineness & creditworthiness of the investors.
