Follow Us :

Madras High Court

Reassessment after four years on change of opinion not valid

August 21, 2011 1039 Views 0 comment Print

CIT, Chennai Vs M/s Simpson & Co. (Madras High Court)- There must be a nexus between the material at the hands of the Officer and formation of belief that there was escapement of wealth from assessment on account of the failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly, all material facts. In the absence of any nexus or any one of the requirements, the reassessment proceedings could not be upheld as one falling under Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act.

When the assessee carries out jobwork as a sub-contract to make article marketable, it is entitled to claim Sec 80HH benefits

August 15, 2011 1647 Views 0 comment Print

M/s Sundaram Fasteners Ltd Vs CIT (Madras High Court)- As far as placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax) reported in [2003] 262 ITR 278 is concerned, we do not find, the said decision, in any manner, goes against the case of the assessee. The Unit at Krishnapuram is stated to be the only unit having hot forging machine. It is stated that the assessee, based at Krishnapuram, received bolts and nuts from Padi, manufactured using cold forging. The Krishnapuram unit completes hot forging and after the process comes to Padi where there is further value addition and after assembling nuts and bolts, they are marketed.

Depreciation of the windmills purchased in the same year, prior to the date of search, should be granted in the regular assessment

August 15, 2011 989 Views 0 comment Print

CIT, Chennai Vs A R Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. (Madras High Court)- The Tribunal accepted the case of the assessee based on the letter issued by the Assistant Executive Engineer of the Tamilnadu Electricity Board, that the windmill was commissioned on 30.09.1995.

Even if assessee admits different sums of undisclosed income on two different days, and then retracts one of its statements, no addition can be sustained for having recorded wrong disclosure statements during the search

August 11, 2011 994 Views 0 comment Print

M/s M Narayanan & Bros Vs ACIT (Madras High Court)- In the decision reported in (2006) 287 ITR 209 (P.R. Metrani Vs Commissioner of Income-Tax), dealing with the scope of Section 132(4A), the Supreme Court considered the conclusive character of the statement made in a search operation.

Erection commissioning or installation Service – No Service Tax on laying of Plumbing, drain laying or other installations for transport of fluids etc before 16.5.2005

August 8, 2011 13134 Views 1 comment Print

Section 65(39a) was amended by substituting vide Section 88 of the Finance Act, 2005, which is reproduced below. (39a)’erection, commissioning or installation’ means any service provided by a commissioning and installation agency, in relation to:- (i) erection, commissioning or installation of plant, machinery or equipment; or (ii) installation of– (a) electrical and electronic devices, including wirings or fittings therefore; or (b) plumbing, drain laying or other installations for transport of fluids; or

PF contributions need to be deducted for training period of Junior Employees

August 2, 2011 10288 Views 0 comment Print

Please find enclosed herewith a copy of judgement dated 16/6/2011 delivered by Hon’ble High Court,Madras in the W.P.No. 21520,21782 and 21783/2010 filed in the matter of BSNL Vs. Union of India & others. The Hon’ble High Court has upheld the decision of RPFC that PF contributions need to be deducted for training period of Junior Telecom Officers/Junior Accounts Officers and other similarly placed employees.

Penalty on Disclosure of undisclosed income in revised return to buy peace

July 13, 2011 1460 Views 0 comment Print

Senthamarai Constructions v CIT (High Court of Madras) – Assessee filed the revised return in respect of the first two assessment years and filed the return for the first time for the last of the assessment year only after search in the Managing Partner’s residence, wherein undisclosed cash and investments were found. The conduct of the assessee, hence, assumes significance in coming forward to disclose the income of the firm, which are relatable to the investments made by the Managing Partner.

Madras HC stays Registration of Lawyers For Service Tax

June 30, 2011 1974 Views 0 comment Print

Madras High Court has stayed the Registration of Lawyers For Service Tax. The Court has passed an order of interim injunction dated 24.06.2011 restraining the Ministry of Finance from compelling the members of the Petitioner from registering themselves with the service tax authorities and collecting service-tax from them until further orders in response to writ petition filed by The Revenue Bar Association, Madras.

Whether capital gain arising out of the sale of land and building is liable to be included for computation of book profits under Section 115J?

June 21, 2011 958 Views 0 comment Print

Kumudam Printers Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (Madras high Court)- Whether capital gain arising out of the sale of land and building is liable to be included for computation of book profits under Section 115J – Whether when there is no failure on part of the appellant to disclose any material fact at the time of the original assessment and hence, the reopening of the assessment pursuant to a notice under Section 148 issued after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year is liable to be annulled. – Assessee `s appeal allowed.

Whether Trust entitled to exemption u/s 11 and 12 for amount received as corpus fund as it is not a taxable amount though deposited with sister concern in violation of section 11(5)

June 18, 2011 1265 Views 0 comment Print

Ramalingam Charities Vs CIT, Salem (Madras High Court) – Tribunal considered the claim of the revenue as well as the assessee and pointed out that having regard to the fact that the Trust deed was not existing solely for the educational purposes and that the trust had engaged itself in other activities by running orphanages, Kalyana mandapam, money lending business, etc., it cannot be held that the Trust was one solely carrying on the activities of educational institutions. The Tribunal further pointed out that having regard to the fact that the assessee had not fulfilled the conditions laid down under Section 11(5) of the Act and had diverted the funds to its sister concern, the assessee was not entitled to the exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Act. Honourable HC also held that since the assessee has not satisfied the requirement under Section 11(5) to claim benefit under Section 12 of the Act so not eligible to claim exemption u/s 11 and 12 for amount received as corpus fund.

Search Post by Date
May 2024