SC held that object of creating offence and penalty under the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 is clearly to create deterrence against violation of provisions of the act which are beneficial for the employees.
Supreme Court held that ‘technical services’ under Section 194J read with Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) of Income Tax Act, 1961 denote services to cater to the special needs of the consumer/user, rather not a facility / service offered to all.
Hon’ble SC held that disclosure of checked answer sheets , basis for interview marks is an information which public authority do not holds in fiduciary capacity , hence can be disclosed to information seeker.
It is been held that in case of motor vehicles the registration and sale is a co-terminus activity. Thus, the place of registration is deemed as place at which sale gets concluded. Accordingly, the sales tax has to be paid as per the law in force in the state/Union Territory at which sales so concludes.
The short question which arises in this appeal is whether the second respondent-Corporation was justified in rejecting the application of the appellant for allotment of retail outlet of petroleum/diesel dealership at location Kalamnuri in District Hingoli in the State of Maharashtra, on the ground that the age proof submitted by her was not of the Secondary School as per the norms, but of a Higher Secondary School.
Broker and sub-broker would be liable to face proceedings under FUTP regulations due to their deliberate ignorance of constant suspicious trading transactions executed on the behalf of clients. In the present case, the brokers executed transaction on behalf of their clients in illiquid scrip in short span of time that too for a long period of time.
In the recent decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Punjab Stainless Steel Industries & Ors. reported in [2014] 364 ITR 144 (SC) it has been held that sale proceeds generated from the sale of scrap would not be included in the total turnover for the purpose of deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The short issue is with regard to the deemed registration of an application under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The High Court has taken the view that once an application is made under the said provision and in case the same is not responded to within six months
Question of reassessment arises only when there is an assessment in the first instance i.e. no reassessment is possible without original assessment order passed. The High Court has wrongly not acted upon the ratio laid down in Trustees of H.E.H.
Exemption available under Chapter VI-A in respect of profits of industrial undertakings is available only in respect of income qualifying the litmus test of “profits or gain derived from undertaking”. The revenue and assessees have been locking their horns over the issue of Subsidies
