Goods and Services Tax : Explore the complexities of filing GST appeals when rectification applications are involved. Learn how conflicting timelines and r...
Corporate Law : Learn about the condonation of delay in legal cases and how courts balance flexibility with judicial discipline in extending limit...
Income Tax : Learn about the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), its role, procedures, and recent updates for taxpayers in India navigating t...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn how to navigate the GST appeals process, including filing deadlines, common grounds for appeal, and tips for successful subm...
Income Tax : Circular No. 09/2024 raises monetary limits for tax appeals, promoting efficiency in the income tax system while ensuring focus on...
Income Tax : AIFTP urges swift disposal of 5,49,042 income-tax appeals pending with NFAC/CIT(A), some for over 5 years, to alleviate taxpayers'...
CA, CS, CMA : Explore the functions of ITAT and the procedures for filing Special Leave Petitions in India, covering essential requirements and ...
Income Tax : Supreme Court disposes of 573 direct tax cases due to increased appeal limits from the Union Budget 2024-25, reducing tax litigati...
Income Tax : Explore issues & solutions for appeals to Income Tax Commissioner. Detailed representation by Karnataka State Chartered Accountant...
Income Tax : Discover the staggering figures of 361,748 pending Income Tax appeals as per RTI response. Dive into the detailed analysis of file...
Corporate Law : Appellate Tribunal overturns Benami property attachment order in Rachakonda Srinivas Rao case, citing lack of ownership transfer a...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court, upon perusal of the Amnesty Scheme, noted that even if an appeal is rejected on the basis of limitation, assess...
Goods and Services Tax : Patna High Court grants relief to Cohesive Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd. due to non-constitution of Appellate Tribunal. Full...
Goods and Services Tax : Orissa High Court stays GST demand on non-constitution of GSTAT. Analysis of the judgment in Smt. Sanghamitra Nanda vs. Central Bo...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court permits a company to file a statutory appeal after the limitation period, citing difficulties in accessing the G...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn the appeal process under Section 112 of the CGST Act, including timelines, fees, and required documents. Detailed guidelines...
Income Tax : CBDT raises monetary limits for tax appeals: Rs. 60 lakh for ITAT, Rs. 2 crore for High Court, and Rs. 5 crore for Supreme Court, ...
Goods and Services Tax : CGST Circular 207/1/2024 sets new monetary limits for filing appeals to reduce government litigation. Read more on the specifics a...
Income Tax : Discover the latest Circular from the Ministry of Finance, India, outlining measures to reduce tax litigation by specifying condit...
Income Tax : In a significant move, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has released new guidelines aimed at ensuring the priority or out-...
The assessee claimed deduction u/s 80-IB (10) which was rejected by the AO but allowed by the CIT (A). On appeal by the department, the Tribunal ruled against the assessee and held that it was not eligible for deduction. The assessee filed a MA u/s 254 (2) pointing out that it had cited a judgement of the Kolkota Bench of the Tribunal (which had been considered by the CIT (A)) and a judgement of the Kolkota High Court which had not been considered by the Tribunal when deciding the appeal and the same was a ‘mistake apparent from the record’.
S. 260A permits the filing of an appeal to the High Court within 120 days. In CIT vs. Velingkar Brothers 289 ITR 382 (Bom) (FB), The Full Bench held that the Court had power to condone delay u/s 260A. However, in Hongo India 236 E.L.T. 417 and Chaudharana Steels 238 E.L.T. 705, the Supreme Court held in the context of sections 35H & 35G
We are of the considered opinion that the activity relating to one of the categories could not be subjected to service tax under other category. In other words, the activities relating to Freight forwarding cannot be thought under CHA. The appellants had clearly explained the nature of the charges collected such as Charge Collect fees, Break bulk fees, Profit share from margin Unallocated income, Currency adjustment factor, Air/sea Freight rebate, Commission/ Brokerage, Air freight incentive, Expenses reimbursement billing, etc.
Where the assessee-society was storing the controlled commodities in its godowns as part of its own trading stock, it was not entitled to claim deduction for the margin of profit between issue price and sale price of the controlled commodities under section 80P(2)(e).
In assessment proceedings, the AO raised a query about disallowance of expenditure attributable to exempted dividend income u/s 14A. After considering the assessee’s reply, no disallowance was made u/s 14A, though interest expenditure was disallowed on the ground that it was not for business purposes. This was confirmed by the CIT (A). On appeal by the assessee
The assessee incurred expenditure on issue of convertible debentures. The department claimed that convertible debentures were akin to shares and that in line with the judgement of the Supreme Court in Brooke Bond 225 ITR 798 the expenditure was capital in nature. HELD rejecting the claim that:
Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that assessee, a non-resident foreign company, engaged in the business of providing services in connection with extraction and production of mineral oils, submitted its return of income declaring income at Rs. 2,11,79,270/ – for the Assessment Year 1999-2000. The case was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act
9. In the instant case, since it is not in dispute that the amount, in question, has already been utilized by the Assessee for the purpose of its business from time to time and by Board Resolution the Assessee has transferred the amount to the Reserve Fund Account, and considering the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. T. V. Sundaram Iyengar
H.H. Maharaja v. ACIT – September 12, 2008 – Section 166 can be invoked only when the income is received by the assessee; unless and until the trustees exercise the discretion and distribute the income in favour of any of the beneficiaries, i.e. the assessee, such income cannot be said to be received by the assessee; merely on the basis of presumption, income cannot be taxed in the hands of the assessee.
