Income Tax : Maharashtra Sales Tax Department has published ‘List of Suspicious Dealers, who have issued false bills, without delivery of goo...
Income Tax : Yes, in certain case even if assessee received money through proper banking channels still it may attract tax @ 82.50% if assessee...
Income Tax : Now-a-days Income Tax department investigates alleged trading/investment in shares and securities with collusion/connivance with a...
Fema / RBI : In September 2016, RBI has issued Master Direction - Non-Banking Financial Company –Non-Systemically Important Non-Deposit takin...
Income Tax : While presenting budget 2017, there were several amendments proposed by Finance Minister Mr. Arun Jaitley with respect to Taxation...
Income Tax : In the case of CIT vs. Smt.Datta Mahendra Shah, Bombay High court held that once department has accepted decision of ITAT given in...
Income Tax : In the case of Allscripts (India) Private Ltd.vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, ITAT Ahemdabad held that for the purpose of fi...
Income Tax : In the case of Nileswar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham Vs. CIT, High court of Kerla at Ernakulam has h...
Income Tax : In the case of Equity Intelligence India Pvt Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam has h...
Income Tax : In the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Shri Tulsi Ram Modi, HC of Rajasthan at Jaipur has held that labourer hired by the assessee employed a...
In the case of Shri Thomas George Muthoot vs The Commissioner of Income Tax High court has held that TDS if to be deducted by individual who required to get his accounts audited. A statutory provision
In the case of Shri Hasmukh N. Gala vs. ITO, ITAT has held that if assessee has invested substantial amount in new property, also received letter of allotment for new property then AO can’t denied exemption available u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act 1961.
In the case of Pespsi Foods Pvt Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner of income Tax, (Delhi High Court) has held that third proviso to section 254 (2A) through the insertion of the expression – ‘even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee’– by virtue of the Finance Act, 2008
In the case of Asst Shri Ashokkumar Bhailal v Income Tax Officer, ITAT Ahmedabad has held that addition made on basis of witness statements, without giving assessee an opportunity to cross examine the witness and without collaborating other independent evidence is not sustainable in law.
In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs The Executive Engineer Court of Karnataka( Kalaburagi Bench) has held that if a person executing the work, purchases the materials from a person other than the customer
In the case of Akansha Ranju Pilani vs. Income Tax officer, (ITAT Mumbai) has held that Only the expenditure/outgoings specified under the relevant head of income and, further, subject to the conditions specified in respect thereof, stand to be allowed in computing the income under that head of income.
In the case of CIT vs Anshikha Consultants Pvt Ltd, Delhi High Court held that whether the assessee company charged a higher premium or not, should not have been the subject matter of the enquiry in the first instance.
In the case of HCL Technologies BPO Services Ltd vs. ACIT, ITAT has held that for transfer pricing only amount retained by associates from end user is to be taken into account for transfer pricing adjustment, and to adjust operating cost by excluding abnormal cost incurred on a/c of Startup Company like salary, rent, and depreciation.
In the case of Tecnimont ICB House vs. DCIT, ITAT has held that Recovery of expenses beyond the normal period was in the nature of deemed loan in the hands of AEs and require transfer pricing adjustment.
In the case of Shri Barjinder Singh Bhatti vs. ITO ITAT has held that in absence of not having any evidence or material before him to contradict the report of the Registered Valuer, AO cannot reject valuation report of Registered Valuer.
