The Judicial Functioning Of The Supreme Court Of India Is Separate/ Independent From Its Administrative Functioning. The Dissemination Of Information Under The SCR Is A Part Of Judicial Function, Exercise Of Which Cannot Be Taken Away By Any Statute. The SCR Would Be Applicable With Regard To The Judicial Functioning Of The Supreme Court; Whereas For The Administrative Functioning Of The Supreme Court, The RTI Act Would Be Applicable.
Lack of opportunity at the revisional stage under Section 263 does not vitiate the entire order, or the proceedings; rather it is a curable defect. Court is of the opinion that the ruling in Commissioner of Income tax v Amitabh Bacchan 2016 SCC Online SC 484 is decisive; it upholds the power of the Commissioner to consider all aspects which were the subject matter of the AO’s order, if in his opinion, they are erroneous, despite the assessee’s appeal on that or some other aspect.
The petitioner – a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 – has filed the present petition impugning communications dated 01.08.2014 and 07.12.2015 (hereafter referred to as the impugned communications)
Since satisfaction note was recorded by AO of searched person who also happened to be AO of assessee (other person) as well to effect that seized documents belonged to assessee, issuance of notice under section 153C on basis of such note was justified.
Court is satisfied that no error was committed by the ITAT in holding that the value declared in the tax return filed by the Assessees under WTA cannot be taken to be the cost of acquisition in the hands of the Assessees.
The challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated 21-12-2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner (PCIT) rejecting the Petitioners application under section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) on the ground of limitation.
Section 145 (2), as amended, has to be read down to restrict power of the Central Government to notify ICDS that do not seek to override binding judicial precedents or provisions of the Act. The power to enact a validation law is an essential legislative power that can be exercised, in the context of the Act, only by the Parliament and not by the executive. If Section 145 (2) of the Act as amended is not so read down it would be ultra vires the Act and Article 141 read with Article 144 and 265 of the Constitution.
Rule 8D is triggered only in a case where the AO is not satisfied with the deduction made by the Assessee. The reasons to believe assume and are predicated on the belief that the AO should not have accepted the Petitioner’s deduction as explained and justified, albeit should have applied Rule 8D. Thus, the view and opinion formed by the AO, while passing the original assessment orders is doubted as erroneous. This is obviously a case of change of opinion.
Chemico Synthetics Limited V/S. Union Of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) – HC held that an interim relief can be granted to exporters to continue making duty free imports against Advance Authorization (AA) licenses issued to them prior to 1-7-2017 where period of validity of license remains unexpired, however the same shall be subject to certain conditions as prescribed.
Circular No. 20/2017 makes clear the intention of the Department not to contest those cases where the assessees had been given the benefit of adjustment of seized cash against the advance tax liability. There cannot be a situation where for those Assessees who have continued to remain in default of payment of advance tax the benefit […]
