Income Tax : The reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s MT Builders Pvt. Ltd., (...
Income Tax : The assessee company is engaged in real estate business. It paid cash advance for purchasing a plot and reflected it in balance sh...
Income Tax : AO made the disallowance by invoking the provisions of section 40A(2) of the Act, however nothing was brought on record on the bas...
Income Tax : The reopening has basically been done for two reasons – the first one being the alleged difference between Unsecured Loans from ...
Income Tax : In the present case also the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2010 in the name of the deceased assessee and claimed t...
Service Tax : Tribunal held that the service provided by appellant was not in relation to agriculture. Further appellant’s claim that service ...
Service Tax : In the entirety of the show cause notice there is not a single assertion proposing to levy and collect service tax on the basis o...
AO made the disallowance by invoking the provisions of section 40A(2) of the Act, however nothing was brought on record on the basis of the comparative analysis to substantiate that the commission paid to the related parties was higher than the commission paid to unrelated parties.
The reopening has basically been done for two reasons – the first one being the alleged difference between Unsecured Loans from Directors in the Balance Sheet and Unsecured Loans from Directors in Audit Report under Form 3CD; and the second one
In the present case also the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2010 in the name of the deceased assessee and claimed to have been served upon the deceased assessee who had already expired on 06.12.2002.
Tribunal held that the service provided by appellant was not in relation to agriculture. Further appellant’s claim that service provided by it are eligible for exemption under notification no. 17/2005-ST, dated 07.06.2005
In the entirety of the show cause notice there is not a single assertion proposing to levy and collect service tax on the basis of any specified taxable services allegedly rendered by the appellant except the several alternative taxable services speculated to have been provided.
It is well settled that the parameters of judging the justification for addition made in the assessment case of the assessee is different from the penalty imposed on account of concealment of income or filing of inaccurate particulars of income and that certain disallowance/addition could legally be made in the assessment
Assessing officer has made few additions in his assessment order which were later on deleted by the CIT (A) on merits. Revenue preferred an appeal to the Tribunal against an order of CIT(A). However in this case the tax effect was less than Rs 4 lacs.
1. The assessee is an individual, who earned rental income from certain properties and claimed deduction for interest on loan paid by the assessee as interest u/s 24(b)of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The A.O., on perusal of interest certificate given by the bank, noticed that out the total interest of Rs. 29,89,223/-
The reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s MT Builders Pvt. Ltd., (2012) 349 R 271 (All.) that the notice issued by an Officer who had no valid jurisdiction over the assessee is invalid. Accordingly, The notice under Section 148 of the Act issued by the Income Tax Officer
The Tribunal, in assessment year 2006-07, in the assessee’s own case and on identical facts/ circumstances, has given a clear finding that the fee received by the assessee for providing marketing and liasioning services cannot be equated with the advisory services given to an investment manager.
