Income Tax : The Petitioner contended some of the directions issued by the Respondent are bad in law because the Respondent has delegated upon ...
Income Tax : A) The rationale behind the introduction of the provision of Special Audit √ Assessee is liable to get its account audited u/s 4...
CA, CS, CMA : Background: Quality control is applied to achieve company’s vision to be a distinguished company. By maintaining a standard qual...
Goods and Services Tax : Introduction to GST Audit GST is a trust-based taxation regime wherein the assessee is required to self-assess his returns and det...
Goods and Services Tax : In this article we have discussed GST Audit ) GST Audit based on Turnover by a CA or CMA u/s 35(5) 2) GST Audit by Tax Authoriti...
CA, CS, CMA : Get details on the empanelment of Cost Accountants under Income-tax Act, 1961. Notice issued by the Principal Chief Commissioner o...
CA, CS, CMA : Income Tax Department invites C.A./C.A. Firms in Bihar & Jharkhand to apply for empanelment as Special Auditors. Eligibility, term...
CA, CS, CMA : Income-tax Department, Mumbai intends to invite application from reputed Chartered Accountant firms/propreitary concerns for empan...
CA, CS, CMA, Company Law : 1. Revised SA 700, Forming an Opinion and Reporting on Financial Statements. 2. New SA 701, Communicating Key Audit Matters in the...
CA, CS, CMA : Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has sought the help of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India for investigation of ...
Income Tax : Explore the Delhi High Court's ruling in PCIT vs. B.L. Kashyap. Learn why CIT cannot extend Section 142(2C) Audit report submissio...
Income Tax : SC held that order directing special audit under Section 142(2A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 is required to be communicated to appel...
Income Tax : Since AO had taken recourse to the provisions of section 142(2A) only with a view to extend the period of limitation by virtue of ...
Income Tax : India Yamaha Motor Private Limited Vs PCIT (Delhi High Court) Writ of India Yamaha Motor (P) Ltd., Hon’ble Delhi High Court ...
Income Tax : Dishman Infrastructure Limited Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) Request made by the learned Sr. Advocate Mr.M. R. Bhatt for the respon...
Income Tax : Income Tax Department Amritsar Central Revenue Building, Room No. 206, 1st Floor, Maqbool Rd, C Block, Amritsar, Punjab 143001 E-m...
Get details on the empanelment of Cost Accountants under Income-tax Act, 1961. Notice issued by the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune. Apply by 29.02.2024
Income Tax Department invites C.A./C.A. Firms in Bihar & Jharkhand to apply for empanelment as Special Auditors. Eligibility, terms, and conditions outlined. Apply within 15 days.
Explore the Delhi High Court’s ruling in PCIT vs. B.L. Kashyap. Learn why CIT cannot extend Section 142(2C) Audit report submission time; crucial insights revealed.
SC held that order directing special audit under Section 142(2A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 is required to be communicated to appellant-assessee, so as to know the reasons, and, if required, the assessee can choose to exercise the option to challenge the order.
Income-tax Department, Mumbai intends to invite application from reputed Chartered Accountant firms/propreitary concerns for empanelment to carry out Special Audit u/s. 142(2A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the period 2023-24 and 2024-25.
Since AO had taken recourse to the provisions of section 142(2A) only with a view to extend the period of limitation by virtue of clause (iv) of Explanation 1 to section 153(9) for completion of assessment, without the conditions being satisfied in section 142(2A), therefore, the assessment framed by AO under section 143(3) was barred by limitation and invalid.
India Yamaha Motor Private Limited Vs PCIT (Delhi High Court) Writ of India Yamaha Motor (P) Ltd., Hon’ble Delhi High Court has admitted the Writ and has stayed the operation of letter of direction and order for special audit u/s 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the same were issued in violation of […]
The Petitioner contended some of the directions issued by the Respondent are bad in law because the Respondent has delegated upon a special auditor the work which he himself was required to do thereby is in the nature of investigation. Such directions cannot be segregated from the other directions and therefore submitted that the entire order containing the directions be quashed and set aside.
Dishman Infrastructure Limited Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) Request made by the learned Sr. Advocate Mr.M. R. Bhatt for the respondent to exclude the period during which the present petition remained pending in the High Court after issuance of the notice i.e. from 14.6.20201 till this date, deserves to be considered for the purpose of […]
Income Tax Department Amritsar Central Revenue Building, Room No. 206, 1st Floor, Maqbool Rd, C Block, Amritsar, Punjab 143001 E-mail: amritsar.ito.hql.ccit@incometax.gov.in No.0183-2506392 El No.0183-2506419 Date: 03.02.2021 Order Sub:- Empanelment of Chartered Accountant for Special Audit u/s 142(2A) of Income Tax Act, 1961: – Additional Order Regarding In pursuance of Rule 14B of the Income Tax […]
