Section 35L is being amended so as to clarify that determination of disputes relating to tax ability or excisability of goods is covered under the term ‘determination of any question having a relation to rate of duty’ and hence, appeal against Tribunal orders in such matters would lie before the Supreme Court.
High Court held that that ‘Azaan’ is no doubt an essential part of the Muslim religion but the use of microphones is certainly not an integral part of ‘Azaan’
Advocate Akhilesh Kumar Sah Just because the assessee has not filed income tax returns in earlier years, it can not be said that the activities of the assessee of the charitable trust / society were not genuine and grant of the registration under section 12AA cannot be denied
Section 14 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 does not confer a power upon the appellate authority to pass an order more burdensome than the order appealed against. It does not entitle the appellate authority to enhance the penalty.
PCIT Vs Daljit Singh Sra Prop M/s Sra Construction Co. Bathinda (Punjab & Haryana High Court) Case Law On Additional Evidences Filed Under Rule 46a: Pcit V. Daljit Singh Sra (2017) (P&H) Where additional evidences filed under rule 46A was relevant for calculation of real income of assessee, same was to be admitted Before the […]
The withdrawals have been found to be subsequently redeposited after a gap of two or three months which is not probable. The assessee therefore we find has not been able to link the cash withdrawn from the bank with cash deposit we therefore uphold the order of the learned CIT(A) treating the cash deposit of Rs. 14,20,212/- as unexplained income of the assessee.
The assessee has been held entitled to adjustment of cash seized against its advance tax dues. It has further been held that the Explanation 2 to Section 132B of the Act is not retrospective in nature.
Where no possession had been given by the transferor to the transferee of the entire land in part performance of JDA so as to fall within the domain of section 53A and in absence of registration of JDA, although executed afterwards, the agreement did not fall under section 53A and consequently section 2(47)(v) did not apply and no further amount had been received and no action thereon had been taken, therefore, appeal of Revenue was dismissed.
The Pr. CIT (Central) Vs. Sh. Hitesh Gandhi (Punjab and Haryana High Court) Assessing Officer was not able to contradict the facts regarding purchase of shares and sale thereof. Further, it was recorded that the assessee had sold shares through MTL shares and Stock Broker limited which is a SEBI registered Stock Broker. The payment […]
The presumption against the value being understated (not undervalued) is greater where parties are connected or related. However, if the AO does not allege that the assessee received more consideration than is stated in the sale deed, he cannot made an addition to the stated consideration.
