CA, CS, CMA : Explore the implications of the inclusion of practicing professionals like CAs, CSs, and CWAs under the Prevention of Money-Launde...
Income Tax : Discover the FAQs on issues in filing Tax Audit Report Form 3CA-CD/3CB-CD. Learn about prerequisites, process, and more....
Goods and Services Tax : Hon’ble SC has in the case of UNION OF INDIA & ORS v/s M/S VISHNU AROMA POUCHING PVT. LTD. & ANR in SPECIAL LEAVE PETITI...
Income Tax : How much Vivad would be closed and how much Vishwas the Vivad se Vishwas scheme will be able to achieve that in coming months woul...
Income Tax : As mark of celebration of 159th Income Tax Day on 24th July,2019, CBDT in a mega event to be held in Delhi to be graced by Hon’b...
CA, CS, CMA : Members & Students Services (Grievances Handling and e-Sahaayataa) Directorate The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India...
Income Tax : We are drawing your kind attention towards Proposed Amendment in Section 43B of The Income Tax Act, 1961, which is detrimental to ...
Income Tax : CBDT proposes to introduce a common ITR by merging all the existing returns of income except ITR-7. However, the current ITR-1 and...
Goods and Services Tax : Clarification regarding time limit for certain compliances pursuant to issuance of Notification No. 18/2022-Central Tax dated 28.0...
Income Tax : EOW cracked a major PAN India income tax refund scam being operated from Delhi NCR area. Economic Offences Wing, Bhubaneswar arr...
Income Tax : Explore the detailed analysis of the ITAT Bangalore decision in Goworamma Lingappa Manjula Vs ITO. Understand the implications and...
Income Tax : Explore the ITAT Bangalore's decision in Lakshmi Multipurpose Co-operative Vs ITO regarding income threshold limits under Section ...
Corporate Law : Explore Delhi High Court's landmark verdict in Union of India vs. Kiran Kanojia. Insights into National Litigation Policy, its im...
Income Tax : Allahabad High Court quashes Section 263 order and imposes cost of Rs 10,000 on PCIT for lack of proper opportunity. Analysis of t...
Income Tax : In respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made in absence of any incriminating material found during search...
Income Tax : Understand CBDT's recent clarifications on trust audit reports. Learn about substantial contributions, relatives, and concerns in...
CA, CS, CMA : Government notifies that following transactions done by CA, CS & CMA on behalf of their client will be covered under Preventio...
Company Law : NFRA's investigations inter-alia revealed that CDGL's Auditors for FY 2018-19 failed to meet relevant requirements of Standards on...
Company Law : Instances of non-compliance with Indian Accounting Standards (Ind ASs) on Accounting Policies for measurement of Revenue from Cont...
Income Tax : Representations have been received by the Board stating that Form No.10A in some of such cases could not be filed by 31.03.2022. I...
Hon’ble Delhi ITAT has in the case of M/s. Fortune Ploymers Industries Pvt.Ltd. vs. DCIT, has held that Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed on an un-detailed assessment order passed in a cursory and summary manner .
Brief facts of the case are that The assessee received a sum of Rs.90,090/- towards reimbursement of medical expenses from the company M/s Bajaj Consultants Pvt. Ltd., wherein, he is a Director and claimed the same as exempt u/s 17(2) of the Act.
Hon’ble Delhi ITAT has in the case of DCIT V/s Soni Sonu Mirchandani has held that indexed cost of acquisition to be computed with reference to the year in which the previous owner first held the gifted assets.
The fact of actual sale consideration received by the assessee has not been disputed by the Assessing Officer but the addition was made simply by applying the deeming provisions of section 50C. Therefore, in view of the various decisions as relied upon by the Ld. Authorized Representative as well as by the CIT(A), we do not find any error in the impugned order of CIT(A) in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c).
The dictum laid down in case of Rubber Udyog Vikas (P) Ltd. is that incorrect claim would not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars unless it is established that assesee has acted with malafide intention.
The principles of natural justice are those which have been laid out by the Courts as being the minimum protection of the rights of an individual against the arbitrary procedure that may be adopted by a judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative authority while making an order affecting those rights.
The assessee has shownexpenditure on advertisement through outdoor display which includes payment for advertisement on hoarding/board. The A.O. further noticed that the assessee has deducted TDS @ 2% u/s.194C on these payments.
In the assessment order passed u/s.144 the income was at Rs.12,96,457/- as against the returned income of Rs.1,20,000/-. During the course of assessment proceeding, the AO found that there was a cash deposit of Rs.11,76,457/- in the bank account of the assessee maintained with ICICI Bank.
The assessee entered into an agreement with an Export House M/s Rajnikant & Bros. As per the terms of the agreement M/s Rajnikan & Bros imported consignment of “Almonds in Shell” at Madras Port. This import was actually for one of the nominee of the assessee M/s Peanut Products
In Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Creative Dyeing and Printing Pvt. Ltd., 318 ITR 476, an advance was given to the said assessee by the sister concern, which held 50% of the share holding in the assessee concern for mordenisation project.
