Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Madras High Court

HC Quashes section 276C(2) Prosecution as Tax dues were subsequently paid

March 12, 2020 3408 Views 0 comment Print

 It was admitted in the counter-affidavit itself that the assessee had cleared the dues and as on date no tax dues were payable in respect of previous financial years. Inasmuch as the tax has been subsequently paid, continuance of the impugned prosecution under section 276C(2) would only amount to an abuse of legal process.

Section 234E is not violative of Constitution of India: Madras HC

March 11, 2020 4524 Views 0 comment Print

Qatalys Software Technologies Private Limited Vs Union of India (Madras High Court) Revenue is right in contending that Section 234 (E) of the Act is not a penalty. Penalty is levied under Section 271 (H) and is not automatic. Penalty is levied only when tax is deducted at source along with interest fee is not deposited […]

Best Judgment Assessment cannot be passed on the ground of debatable issue

March 10, 2020 2100 Views 0 comment Print

On debatable issues, even if the addition in taxable turnover is made by the Assessing Officer, it does not amount to Best Judgment Assessment, which can be passed, only if the regular books of accounts and the return filed by the Assessee are rejected for given reasons

Non speaking orders are non est and not sustainable

March 9, 2020 3192 Views 0 comment Print

Shyam Textiles Limited Vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Madras High Court) In the given case the crux of the problem lies in the order passed by the learned Commissioner under Section 28A of the Act, which is as brief and non speaking as it could be. The learned Commissioner, while exercising the powers under Section […]

Use of & downloading of C Forms allowed to purchase PNG & Liquor Products

March 9, 2020 6015 Views 1 comment Print

Use of and online facility for downloading C Forms for inter-state purchase of petroleum crude, diesel, petrol, aviation turbine fuel, natural gas and liquor should not be restricted as if sale of the goods was the only criteria of registration under the CST Act, the consequent amendments would not have allowed concessional rate of tax for purchase of those six commodities for user in activities like Mining or Telecommunication Networks, where no such resale or use in manufacturing was involved. Therefore, such a right was equally available to other industries like Cement Industries and the same could not be denied to them.

E-Assessment without human interaction may lead to erroneous assessment

March 7, 2020 1839 Views 0 comment Print

Salem Sree Ramavilas Chit Company Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) .The Government of India has introduced E-Governance for conduct of assessment proceedings electronically. It is a laudable steps taken by the Income Tax Department to pave way for an objective assessment without human interaction. At the same time, such proceedings can lead to erroneous assessment […]

No reassessment can be made solely on basis of statement recorded u/s 133A

March 6, 2020 5430 Views 0 comment Print

Reassessment was not justified wholly on the basis of a sworn statement recorded in the course of survey in the absence of any other tangible evidence available with the Assessing Officer as the materials collected and the statement obtained under Section 133A would not automatically bind upon the assessee.

NI Act | Section 138 Proceedings Not Maintainable against Independent Non-Executive Directors

March 3, 2020 12108 Views 1 comment Print

Sunita Palta & Ors. Vs. Kit Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (Madras High Court) Non-Executive Directors are, therefore, persons who are not involved in the day-to-day affairs of the running of the company and are not in charge of and not responsible for the conduct of the business of the company.’ Admittedly, the petitioners are neither the […]

Order passed by CESTAT without considering case on merits should be re-considered

March 2, 2020 1845 Views 0 comment Print

Since there was absolutely no material that Revenue had failed in strictly adhering the limitation period under Regulation 20(7) of CBLR, 2013 and it was not the Revenue, who kept the file, without passing the final order under Regulation 20(7) within the 90 days limitation period and it had been kept pending only at the instance of the Respondent/Licensee, therefore,  the matter was remitted back to CESTAT for fresh consideration only on the merits of the issue, not on the ground or point on limitation under Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013.

Employees contribution to EPF & ESIC allowable if paid within relevant due date

March 1, 2020 6708 Views 0 comment Print

PCIT Vs Orchid Pharma Ltd. (Madras High Court) Employee’s contribution should be paid within the due date as provided in the related statutes to be allowed as deduction under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act.  A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s.Merchem Ltd. [reported in (2015) 378 ITR […]

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031