Directions be issued to all the District And Sessions Judges In the States of Punjab, Haryana and U.T. Chandigarh for directing the officials concerned to start capturing/ entering the Aadhar Number of the parties while entering the cases in CIS 2.0. The members of the Bar may be requested to provide the Aadhaar number for the aforesaid Purpose.
Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the State of Punjab and the State of Karnataka. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are the Excise & Taxation Commissioner and the Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority (ETO).
CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Lord Krishna Charitable Trust (Punjab and Haryana High Court) Section 12AA prescribes the scope and ambit of the enquiry that the CIT is authorized to carry out at the time of grant of registration to a trust or institution. The scope of the enquiry revolves around the nature of the objects and […]
Pr. CIT Vs Dr. Amrik Singh Basra (Punjab & Haryana High Court) After considering the relevant statutory provisions and the case law, the following conclusions were drawn :– “(1) Perusal of the JDA dated 25-2-2007 read with sale deeds dated 2-3-2007 and 25-4-2007 in respect of 3.08 acres and 4.62 acres respectively would reveal that […]
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.
