Sky Light Hospitality LLP, a limited liability partnership, who had on 13.05.2016 taken over and acquired rights and liabilities of M/s Sky Light Hospitality Private Limited upon conversion under the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008, has filed the present writ petition impugning notice dated 30.03.2017 for the assessment year 2010-11 under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟ for short).
Principal CIT Vs. Smt. Ritu Singal (Delhi High Court) In construing Section 271AAA one must not lose sight of its essential purpose which resulted in its enactment. There is a penalty at the rate of 10% of the undisclosed amount declared, if the conditions in Section 271AAA (2) are not met with. This is quite […]
Shri Shyam Sunder Vs. Sohan Singh @ Shoban Singh (Delhi High Court) The Trial court has held that in view of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, no loan above Rs. 20,000/- could have been given in cash, so the loan transaction is not liable to be recognized. In so far as this is […]
1. Whether ITAT was correct in law in holding that the notice issued by the Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Act beyond the 04 years after the end of relevant assessment year was bad in law as the necessary approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner of Income Tax as per the provisions of Section 151 (1) of the Act had not been obtained by the Assessing Officer
The Delhi High Court, while hearing the writ petition of DANISCO India Private Limited, has read down the provisions of section 206AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which mandates deduction of tax at source (TDS) at twenty percent on payments to non-residents since the provision of DTAA would prevail over the said provision.
A division bench of the Delhi High Court, last day held that mere voluntary surrender of income without disclosing its source cannot rescue assessee from facing penal consequences under the Income Tax Act.
Pr. CIT Vs New Delhi Television Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Legislature itself contemplates the discount on premium under ESOP as a benefit provided by the employer to its employees during the course of sendee. If the Legislature considers such discounted premium to the employees as a fringe benefit or ‘any consideration for employment’, it is […]
1. This bunch of writ petitions have been filed by persons who were directors in companies incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956. Apart from these companies, these petitioners have stated in the writ petitions that they were directors of other companies as well. In several cases, we are informed that the companies in which they were directors are still active.
CBDT Vs. Satya Narain Shukla (Delhi High Court) A plain reading of Section 24(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 indicates that the provisions of the Act would not be applicable to Intelligence and Security Organizations as specified in the Second Schedule. Further, any information received from such organizations falls under the exclusionary clause […]
Indo Arya Central Transport Limited & Ors. Vs. CIT – TDS (Delhi High Court) HC held that At this stage, it will neither be fair nor proper for the writ court to question and decide the question of validity of Sanction Order on merits of reasonable cause etc. as it would amount to a pre […]
