Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Advocate Bharat Agarwal

Latest Judiciary


Interest under Section 35FF Commences from Appellate Authority’s Order Date: Delhi HC

Excise Duty : In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed that Section 35FF of the Excise Act indicates that interest ...

July 27, 2023 600 Views 0 comment Print

Demanding legitimate dues is not extortion under Section 385 of IPC

Corporate Law : In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble High Court quashed the proceedings under Section 385 of IPC pertaining to extortion as...

July 25, 2023 1596 Views 0 comment Print

Public Authority not required to provide ‘opinion’ or ‘advice’ under RTI: CIC

Corporate Law : Unravel the Rahul Gupta vs CPIO case where the CIC upheld that public authorities are not obliged to provide opinions or advice u...

June 28, 2023 2202 Views 0 comment Print

Order Supported by Reasoning, Documents and Facts: Not Arbitrary

Corporate Law : Rajasthan High Court upheld order of Electricity Ombudsman, which allowed recovery of transformation losses and pro-rata transform...

June 28, 2023 441 Views 0 comment Print

Licence/ Royalty fees to facilitate Trading Operation & Effective Management is Revenue in Nature

Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held in case of DCIT v Hitz FM Radio India Ltd. that expenditure related to licence fee and royalty which helps merely ...

January 27, 2016 1486 Views 0 comment Print


Interest u/s 234C is to be levied on Assessed or Returned income whichever is less

June 12, 2015 15320 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Abhishek Cotspin Mills Ltd. v ACIT it is held by ITAT Pune that whenever the Assessee declares the returned income which is higher than the actual Asseessed Income, then interest would be charged under section 234C on the assessed Income and In case assessed income is higher than returned Income Than such Interest will be charged on returned Income.

Valuation u/s 50C should be Preferably handed to the Valuation Officer in the event of dispute

June 12, 2015 588 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Masud Ahmed Qureshi v ITO it was held by ITAT Pune that whenever, there is a dispute regarding the valuation u/s 50C, it would be better to refer the matter to the Valuation Officer so that the proper report could be furnished regarding it.

Section 148 could not be invoked in absence of any Tangible Material

May 28, 2015 1616 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Chennai held in the case of DCIT vs M/s. Sri Balasubramania Mills Ltd. that the section 148 could only be invoked whenever there is a failure on the side of Assessee to furnish all the necessary details. But, in this case the details were furnished as relevant sale deed was available with the AO

Alternative Remedy is a Bar to invoke extraordinary powers under Article 226

May 13, 2015 793 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of M/s. Nepa Agency Co. Pvt. Ltd & Anr v Union of India, Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that whenever in a statute a remedy is provided or an alternative remedy is there, then there is no need to entertain the Writ Petitions.

Whenever order of Re-assessment is passed, Period of Limitation will start from the date of Re-assessment order and not from Original Assessment order

April 15, 2015 1269 Views 0 comment Print

Rastriya Ispat Nigam Limited v. ACIT In this case the writ petition was filed by the Assessee in which the AP High Court while dismissing the writ petition held that whenever an order is made under the re-assessment

Section 263 could be invoked if both the ingredients are satisfied

March 31, 2015 1099 Views 0 comment Print

While discussing the Revisional powers of CIT(A) u/s 263 it was held that the Commissioner has to be satisfied of twin conditions, namely, i) the order is erroneous; and ii) it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.

Godown Rent cannot be treated as business Income as it’s not a continuous activity from year to year

March 11, 2015 19746 Views 2 comments Print

High Court held that Business is a continuous activity which is done year to year. Here, in this case the Assessee let out his godown and shown income as Income from Business instead of Income from property to which the High court do not agree

Explanation 3C to section 43B will have retrospective effect for actual payments

February 11, 2015 1792 Views 0 comment Print

In the present facts of the Case the Hon’ble High Court held that Explanation 3C to section 43B is having retrospective effect from 01/04/1989. Therefore, conversion of interest amount into loan would not be actually deemed to be actual payment.

Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031