Adjudication proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962 could not solely be based on the inculpatory statements of witnesses and noticee alone. Such statements could be only used for corroborating the case which the Department proposed to establish before the quasi-judicial authorities.
The issue under consideration is whether the Assessing officer is correct in rejecting the objections filed by the petitioner against the reasons for reopening the assessment without passing speaking order?
The issue under consideration is whether the request of the petitioner for waiver of interest under Section 234A, Section 234B and Section 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is granted by HC or not?
In the given case The appellant made a contribution of Rs.1,00,000/- during the year, to M/s.Herbicure Healthcare Bio-herbal Research Foundation, Calcutta. The institution was approved to get the contributions under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
A person who has purchased the property using proceeds of crime cannot said to have any interest in the property and the protection under Article 300 A cannot be pressed into service by a perpetrator of a crime. Mere order of attachment could not be said to be violative of the constitutional right to property of the Article 300 A of the Constitution of India.
Deductions either under Section 10A or 10B would be made while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking and not at the stage of computation of the total income.
When partnership firm was transformed into private limited company, there was no distribution of assets and as such, there was no transfer and therefore, assessee was not liable to pay any tax on capital gains.
Choe Jae Won Vs Principal Secretary to the Government (Madras High Court) Finding justification in the plea made by the learned Government Pleader and considering the fact that, several Non-Bailable Warrants have already been issued to the Petitioners and that, there is every possibility of the Petitioners fleeing away from the clutches of Law, this […]
All interim orders passed by the High Court at Madras – Principal Bench that were subsisting as on 20th March, 2020 may stand extended till 30th April, 2020 unless vacated or modified earlier or until further orders of the Court unless specifically dealt with by any judicial order to the contrary.
It is abundantly clear from Sub-Section (2) that an assessee who is eligible to claim deduction u/s 80IA has the option to choose the initial/first year from which it may desire the claim of deduction for ten consecutive years, out of a slab of fifteen (or twenty) years, as prescribed under that Sub-Section. It is hereby clarified that once such initial assessment year has been opted for by the assessee, he shall be entitled to claim deduction u/s 80IA for ten consecutive years beginning from the year in respect of which he has exercised such option subject to the fulfillment of conditions prescribed in the section.
