In AY 2002-03, the assessee suffered a long-term capital loss. U/s 74(1) as it then stood, such loss could be carried forward and set off against all capital gains including short-term capital gains. S. 74 was amended in AY 2003-04 to provide that long-term capital loss could only be set-off against long-term capital gains and not against short-term-capital gain
In CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court was considering a case of reopening u/s 147 within 4 years from the end of the assessment year. The Court held that when a regular order of assessment is passed in terms of section 143 (3) of the Act, a presumption can
The amount paid for compounding an offence is inevitably a penalty in terms of section 483 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 itself and the mere fact that it has been described as compounding fee cannot, in any way, alter the character of the payment which payment, is in the nature of penalty.
As would be evident from the pleadings and submissions made on behalf of the respective arties, the main question which we are called upon to consider is whether in the absence of publication of the Rules and Bye-laws of the Bombay Stock Exchange, which had been framed prior to its recognition in 1956 under the 1956 Act, its activities could be said to be without authority.
Supreme Court (SC) [2010-TIOL-04- SC-IT] in the case of Oracle Software India Ltd. (Taxpayer) on the issue of whether the process of converting a blank compact disc (CD) into a recorded CD, by duplicating the master copy of software on it, constitutes manufacture under the Indian Tax Law (ITL) for the purpose of claiming tax holiday
Explore the Supreme Court’s ruling on change of opinion in tax assessments & Section 147 amendments post Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987
The income from investment activity was offered as capital gains while the income from dealing activity was offered as business income. This position was accepted by the AO in the earlier years. In AY 2005-06, the AO took a different view and held that even the shares held on investment account had to be assessed as business income
The assessee is a State Govt. undertaking. Its appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that the approval of the Committee on Disputes (“COD”) had not been obtained. In a writ petition filed by the assessee, the Additional Solicitor General appearing for the revenue stated that it was not the contention of the revenue that COD approval
No acquirer shall acquire shares or voting rights which (taken together with shares or voting rights, if any, held by him or by persons acting in concert with him), entitle such acquirer to exercise fifteen per cent or more of the voting rights in a company, unless such acquirer makes a public announcement to acquire shares of such company in accordance with the regulations.
In the case of Schefenacker Motherson Ltd v. ITO, ITA No. 4459/DEL/07 for AY 2003-04 and schefenacker Motherson Ltd v. DCIT, ITA No.4460/DEL/07 for AY 2004-05, the Delhi Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal), held that cash profit on sales “CP/Sales” or cash profit on total cost excluding depreciation “CP/TCdep”
