CIT Vs Aimil Ltd – It was held that if the employees contribution is not deposited by the due date prescribed under the relevant Act and is deposited late, the employer not only pays interest on such delayed payment but could incur penalties also. Those Acts permit the employer to make deposit with some delays. Therefore, these amounts could not be disallowed under section 43B
The only reason which has been given seeking reopening of the assessment for the years 1997-98 and 1998-99 is that suppression of sales have taken place on account of the fact that when average price of the closing stock is multiplied with the quantity of the sales in the year then the value of the sales would be at a higher figure than that as declared by the assessee.
A bare reading of s. 2(28A) would reveal that interest is payable in respect of ‘moneys borrowed’ or ‘debt incurred’. It, of course, would include a deposit, claim or other similar right or application of any service fee or other charges in respect of the moneys borrowed or debt incurred. All the subscribers/ members of the chit contribute moneys each month and bid takes place among the members.
Thus, according to the Gujarat High Court, when interest is paid on delayed payment, it can be treated as higher sale price which is converse situation to offering of cash discount because the transaction remains the same and there Is no distinction as to the source Looking from” this angle, the interest becomes part of the higher sale price and is clearly
Gujarat High Court, when interest is paid on delayed payment, it can be treated as higher sale price which is converse situation to offering of cash discount because the transaction remains the same and there is no distinction $s to the source. Looking from’ this angle, the interest becomes part of the hire sale price and is clearly derived from the sales made and is not divorced therefrom
We feel that the Writ Petition’, have to succeed because the contentions as raised on behalf of the counsel for the petitioner are well founded. The only reason which has been given seeking re-opening of the assessment for the years 1997-98 and 1998-99 is that suppression of sales have taken place on account of the fact that when average price of the closing st
The assessee had two units, namely, a steering unit and an axle unit, both of which were eligible u/s 80-I. While one unit was making profits, the other was incurring losses. The AO and CIT (A) took the view that deduction u/s 80-I on the profits of one unit could be allowed only after setting off the losses of the other unit.
S. 2 (24) (x) provides that amounts received by an assessee from employees towards PF contributions etc shall be “income”. S. 36 (1) (va) provides that if such sums are contributed to the employees account in the relevant fund on or before the due date specified in the PF etc legislation, the assessee shall be entitled to a deduction
In absence of Supreme Court’s order staying operations of High Court’s judgment relating to levy of service on renting of immovable property, Revenue Department could not instruct its officers to pursue the matter with tax payers calling upon them to pay service tax on same or to resort to other means under the law to protect the Revenue.
Delhi High Court in the case of Messe Dusseldorf India Pvt. Ltd. (Taxpayer) [2010-TIOL- 74-HC-DEL-IT] dismissing a writ petition, held that in cases where a taxpayer has not been provided an opportunity of being heard by the Transfer Pricing Officer, the taxpayer is entitled to raise all objections and furnish necessary evidence to the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP)
