The salient features of the impugned case have already been noted by us namely, that the assessee is a Co-operative Society, set up by the Government of Punjab registered under the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer has duly noted that its primary business is to grant loans to members in Urban and Rurah Co-operative Housing Societies of the State of Punjab for construction of houses and Housing Complexes. The assessee has been ea
The only issue arising in the appeal was whether while computing the income from capital gains, the fair market value of the property on the date of sale could be adopted as against the sale consideration received by the assessee. In the facts of the instant case, the assessee had sold the property for a total consideration of Rs. 15.25 lakhs. The said value of consideration was accepted by the registering authorities and was not disturbed. The provisions of section 50C were neither applicable nor applied by the Assessing Officer.
No penalty is imposable in respect of vexed legal issues which are debatable or on which two views/opinions are possible. For imposing penalty under s. 271(1)(c), the twin conditions of furnishing of inaccurate particulars or concealment of income has to be satisfied.
The controversy squarely involves interpretation and, construction of the words “manufacture” and, “production” . The word `manufacture’ was not defined under the Act, uptill the insertion of section 2(29BA) by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.r.e.f. 1-4-2009, which reads as under:-
The assessee, a statutory Board, was set up for prevention of pollution of streams and wells in the State and other allied activities. It derived income from various testing charges etc. The CIT granted registration u/s 12AA of the Act on the basis that the activities of the assessee constituted a “charitable purpose” u/s 2 (15) and that its’ income was eligible
7. In the aforestated background now we may advert to the factual position in the instant case. In this case, after the processing of return under section 143(1) the Assessing Officer recorded reasons on 8-2-2006 to initiated proceedings under section 147/148 as under: ” the assessee filed return of income for the above noted assessment year declaring total income at Rs. Nil
We have considered the, rival submissions, perused the material on record. In the instant case, rehabilitation scheme was sanctioned by the BIFR on 05.07.2001, A copy of the summary record of the proceedings of the hearing held on 5.7.2001 before BIFR- have been placed in the Paper Book. It has been held in the aforesaid proceedings para 22 as under:
5. Even if this appeal is viewed with angle of section 15 of the Act, which speaks about chargeability of salary. Section 15 of the Act is reproduced- herewith:- “The following income shall be chargeable to income tax under the head “Salaries”- a). any salary due from an employer or a former employer to an assessee in the previous year, whether paid or not;
In the present case, as is evident from admitted facts, the notice was Under Section 16(1). It is a general notice on the assessee as if she made a gift which had escaped assessment. There is no reference or mention to alleged deemed gift made by her mother Smt. Gurcharan Kaur which the G.T.O. wished to assess.
1.Whether deduction for tax, duty etc. is allowable u/s. 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on payment basis before incurring the liability to pay such amounts? The deduction for tax, duty etc. is allowable u/s. 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on payment basis before incurring the liability to pay such amount. 2.Whether Modvat Credit available to the assessee as on the last day of the previous year amounts to payment of Central Excise duty u/s. 43B?
