Income Tax : Explore the fairness of tax assessments & raids through a detailed analysis of a recent case. Learn about the powers of income tax...
CA, CS, CMA : Comprehensively assess trusts for A.Y 2022-2023, A.Y 2023-2024 and A.Y 2024-2025 by discussing key provisions, changes, and implic...
Income Tax : Explore impact of high-pitch assessments in income tax on small taxpayers. Learn challenges they pose, the need for fairness, and ...
Income Tax : Legal responsibilities of deceased's representatives in income tax proceedings. Learn about Section 159 and key judgments shaping ...
Income Tax : Explore the nuances of Income Tax Assessment for Associations of Persons (AOP) and Bodies of Individuals (BOI) for the Assessment ...
Income Tax : Read KSCAA's representation to the Commissioner of Income Tax, addressing practical issues faced by taxpayers and suggesting solut...
Income Tax : In view of Indiscriminate notices by income Tax Department without allowing reasonable time it is requested to Finance Ministry an...
Income Tax : Lucknow CA Tax Practicioners Association has made a Representation to FM for Extension of Time Limit for Assessment cases time bar...
Income Tax : While uploading Manual order for the A Y 2017-18 user is getting the following message: Manual Order cannot be uploaded for this P...
Income Tax : Tax collections increased from Rs 6.38 Lakh Crore in year 2013-14 to almost Rs 12 Lakh Crore this year 80% growth in tax base; n...
Income Tax : In a case of BVM Global Education Trust vs Assessment Unit, Madras High Court declares computation sheet and demand notice invalid...
Income Tax : Read about the Madras High Court's order for rectification of an income tax assessment order regarding addition on sale considerat...
Income Tax : Kerala High Court nullifies Income Tax assessment order for 2016-17 after petitioner couldn't attend video conferencing due to tec...
Income Tax : Read about the Madras High Court's decision in Rakesh Beniyal Vs ITO case, where the court dismissed a writ petition challenging a...
Income Tax : Kerala High Court rules that an income tax assessment order passed on an old PAN is appealable even if a new PAN is issued, provid...
Income Tax : Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Assessment Unit (AU), Verification Unit (VU), Technical Unit (TU) and Review Unit (RU) unde...
Income Tax : CBDT hereby specifies that all the assessment proceedings pending as on 31.03.2021 and the assessment proceedings initiated on or ...
Income Tax : Faceless Appeal Scheme has been implemented in ITBA and the allocation of cases to Faceless Appeal units is under progress. A numb...
Income Tax : CBDT notifies Prescribed Authority under Section 133C with effect from 13th August, 2020 vide Notification No. 66/2020, Dated: Aug...
Income Tax : CBDT notifies 4195 Income-tax Authorities of Regional e-Assessment Centres to exercise the powers and functions of Assessing Offic...
The government may amend an accounting norm that gives certain exemptions to companies from consolidating the balance sheets of subsidiaries with that of the parent under certain circumstances. The idea is to ensure that companies do not take undue advantage of the exemption and give an unrealistic picture of their financial health. Making it compulsory to consolidate the financial statements of all subsidiaries with that of the parent will give the cumulative effect of all the subsidiaries’ financial performance.
The method adopted by a company to arrive at a transfer price is valid unless the tax officer can prove that the company had manipulated the price to shift profits outside India, the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled. The tribunal has also observed that the transfer pricing officer (TPO) should have sufficient ground to suspect the shift in profits before invoking the transfer pricing rules.
Profits and gains of a newly established undertaking, therefore, have got to be computed as per the provisions of section 29 to section 43A and if the assessee claims relief under Chapter VI-A of the Act, then it is not open to the assessee to disclaim depreciation allowance. This is because Chapter VI-A is an independent code by itself for computing these special types of deductions. In other words, one must first calculate the gross total income from which one must deduct a percentage of incomes contemplated by Chapter VI-A. That such special incomes were required to be computed as per the provisions of the Act, viz., section 29 to section 43A, which included section 32(2). Therefore, one cannot exclude depreciation allowance while computing profits derived from a newly established undertaking for computing deductions under Chapter VI-A. Therefore, the appellant’s claim for allowance of deduction under section 80HH, without taking into consideration the current depreciation will have to be rejected.
Merely because other clubs follow the very same accounting policy, it cannot be said to be beyond scrutiny or verification as to the correctness and completeness of the accounting practice followed, and there is any deficiency in such accounting practice or policy, it can very well be tinkered with howsoever universally followed such policy is; there is no proposition in law to force the revenue to accept the accounting system
Cebon India vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Where the record did not show that the assessee had been served with a notice under section 143(2) before the due date HELD that the assessment proceedings were not valid as the non-service of the notice was a jurisdictional defect and not merely a procedural defect. Held also that s. 292BB was procedural and prospective.
ACIT vs. Prakash I. Shah (i) The exchange rate gain difference pertaining to exports is an integral part of the exports and export turnover and cannot be treated as income from other sources. (ii) However, where such gain relates to exports made in an earlier year, the deduction u/s 80HHC is allowable only in the year in which the exports are made and not in the year of realisation of the gain.
ACIT vs. Bright Star Investment (ITAT Mumbai) – Where the assessee had converted stock-in-trade into investments at their book value and later sold them and offered to tax the difference between the indexed book value and the sale proceeds as capital gains and the AO took the view that the difference between the book value and the FMV on the date of conversion had to be assessed as business income, Held:
Mahendra D. Jain vs. ITO (Bombay High Court) – Where the assessee is carrying on an illegal activity which is treated as a business, any loss arising in such business as a result of confiscation by the authorities is an allowable loss. However, where the assessee is carrying on a lawful business, any loss arising as a result of infraction of the law is not allowable.
SET Satellite (Singapore) vs. DDIT (Bombay High Court) – Where the assessee had a ‘Dependent Agency Permanent Establishment’ (‘DAPE’) (“SET India”) in India and it was admitted by the Revenue that the assessee had paid ‘arms length’ remuneration to the said dependent agent but the Tribunal still held (106 ITD 75) that notwithstanding the taxability of the said dependent agent in accordance with domestic law, the assessee had to be assessed in respect of the profits attributable to the said DAPE, held, reversing the judgment of the Tribunal that
It has been decided that in all the Corporate cases selected for scrutiny as per the guidelines contained in the Action Plan document 2008-09 which have returned income of Rs.5 crore or more and where provisions of FBT apply, assessment order shall also be passed under section 115WE after scrutiny of all such cases.
