Income Tax : The New Tax Regime restricts Section 24(b) benefits, disallowing set-off of home loan interest against salary income. Taxpayers mu...
Income Tax : Summary of key tax rules for rental and house property income under the Income Tax Act, including sub-letting, deemed ownership, c...
Income Tax : Understand Benami property and transactions as per the PBPT Act. Learn what constitutes Benami, who the Benamidar and Beneficial O...
Income Tax : Tax deductions for interest paid on loans play a significant role in personal tax planning, offering relief by reducing taxable in...
Income Tax : Learn how to optimize home loan interest tax benefits for self-occupied and rented properties. Strategies include reducing capital...
Income Tax : While presenting interim Budget 2019-20 FM proposed to exempt the levy of income tax on notional rent on a second self-occupied ho...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that capital gains must be computed using the final stamp value determined after litigation, not an earlier infl...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that at the relevant time co-founder of Flipkart stayed in India for 141 days and balance days in other countr...
Income Tax : The Tribunal upheld taxation of rental receipts as income from house property because the companys principal object was not proper...
Income Tax : The issue was whether stamp duty value as on registration could override actual consideration received earlier. The Tribunal held ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that repeated reopening cannot survive where statutory timelines are breached. A reassessment initiated beyond ...
Fema / RBI : 2. With a view to disseminating information on the SLR status of a Government security, it has been decided that: (i) the SLR stat...
Benami Act was intentionally drafted with a very broad and inclusive definition of property to ensure that all forms of assets, including cash, could be covered. A person could not be treated as a benamidar if they neither possess the property nor claim ownership of it; A property was considered benami when the purported real owner denies their ownership of it.
Delhi High Court held that bail in serious money laundering case involving defalcation of public money not granted as ED’s case is founded not on mere suspicion but on extensive documentary evidence, forensic audits, and statements recorded u/s. 50 of the PMLA.
Jharkhand High Court dismissed the bail application since the twin condition as provided under Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is not being fulfilled. Also, there is sufficient material collected by ED to show that the applicant is prima facie guilty of the alleged offences.
There exists a reasonable belief, duly recorded and supported by material evidence, that the attached properties are involved in money laundering and further, the appellants have failed to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 24 of the PMLA.
Delhi High Court upheld the attachment order under PMLA in view of appellant’s criminal and appellant’s failure to discharge the burden of proving the facts in support of his claim that the attached properties are untainted and not obtained directly or indirectly from criminal activity.
Orissa High Court held that money recovered from the petitioner constitutes ‘proceeds of crime’ unless the same is disproved at trial. Accordingly, proceedings under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] upheld.
Orissa High Court held that writ petition filed beyond the condonable period envisaged under section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [CGST Act] the same is not condoned. Accordingly, writ dismissed.
Jharkhand High Court held that bail application stands dismissed since the material collected shows that the petitioner is prima facie guilty of an offence under Prevention of Money Laundering matter. Accordingly, bail application rejected.
Karnataka High Court granted bail for offence punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PML Act] taking into consideration the maximum punishment for the alleged offences and that there is no possibility of trial commencing in the near future.
Patna High Court held that passing of reassessment order under Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 beyond the time limit stipulated under section 26(3) of the Act is barred by limitation and accordingly, order is liable to be set aside.
