CIT Vs KMC Speciality Hospitals India Ltd (Madras High Court) It can be said that, current depreciation is deductible in the first place from the income of the business to which it relates. If such depreciation amount is larger than the amount of the profits of that business, then such excess comes for absorption from […]
Aswathanarayana & Eswara Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) Expenditure incurred by assessee-firm on partner’s foreign education was to be allowed as deduction when such education was directly related to profession carried on by firm – Madras HC Legal Provisions involved Any expenditure not being in the nature of personal expenses of the assessee laid out […]
It is for the NCLT to decide whether the matter before it ought to be decided or not, whether any injunction operates or impedes the progress of the matter before it and the parties cannot be asked to approach this Court for this Court to hand-hold the NCLT and guide it through its proceedings.
CIT Vs Mr. John Ettimootil Samuel (Madras High Court) 1. Sets aside reassessment framed u/s 147 after expiry of four years of assessment u/s 143(3), holding that the assessee had disclosed all material facts in the original assessment qua consideration and deemed consideration u/s 50C of the Act. 2. The Tribunal was fully justified in […]
REIL Electricals India Ltd. Vs Joint Secretary and ors. (Madras High Court) Madras High Court allows rebate on exports where fraudulent entry in Credit was regularized by subsequent payment Madras High Court in held that, owing to the squaring up of liability by Assessee along with interest to regularize its mistake of fraudulent entry made […]
Since there was close association between the seller and the buyer and their ‘arranged’ pricing were adequately substantiated by TPO / AO / CIT(A), therefore, that part of the CIT(A)’s order was upheld which confirmed in toto AO ‘s order as regards the ALP and the resultant excess profit to be treated as deemed income under ‘other sources’.
It was held by the Supreme Court that merely because the entire share capital was subscribed by the Government of India, it did not mean that the company did not own the property in question. It was held that the company was a separate legal entity.
Kuppan Gounder P.G. Natarajan Vs Directorate General of GST Intelligence (Madras High Court) As far as Section 6(2)(b) of the Act is concerned, this Court is of the considered opinion that the State authorities issued a notice for intimating discrepancies in the return after scrutiny in proceedings dated 17.12.2020. The said proceedings would reveal that […]
B. Anandan Vs Government of India (Madras High Court) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 4.2.2021 for the offence punishable u/s 132 (1) (d) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The petitioner is an Executive Director of […]
The petitioner states that he has paid the customs duty and therefore, no further tax is to be levied. Neither Sales Tax nor Entry Tax is levied for vehicles that are imported. The contention of the petitioner is that, the goods that are manufactured in India suffers payment of Excise Duty and the goods that are imported suffers Customs Duty. By questioning the levy of Entry Tax, the petitioner has prayed for an injunction restraining the respondents from collecting the Entry Tax in respect of the imported vehicle.
