Commissioner of Customs Vs M/s. Motorola India Ltd. (Supreme Court) 3-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has held that an appeal against the CESTAT Order, involving violation of conditions of Customs exemption notification, would lie before the High Court and not the Supreme Court. Remanding the matters back to the High Court, the Apex Court […]
Hon’ble High Court of Kerala which held that an expenditure to be incurred in future in respect of a liability that accrued during the related accounting would be eligible for a deduction.
AO of the searched person had not rebutted the presumption that the seized documents belonged to M/s. C Ltd but belonged to other person, i.e, assessee, therefore, issue of notice under section 153C on assessee was illegal.
Impugned bank certificate is not an incriminating document based on which the concluded assessment in the case of the assessee can be disturbed. In view of this according to us , we hold that no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee in absence of any incriminating evidence leading to any unaccounted income unearthed during the course of search.
Coming to the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, the said section also provides that any interest, royalty, fees for technical services or other sum chargeable under this Act on which tax is deductible at source under chapter XVII-B and such tax has not been deducted or after deduction has not been paid on or before the due date specified in section 139(1) of the Act. We therefore find that both the provisions of section 195(1) as well as 40(a)(ia) of the Act talks about deduction of tax at source where the sum is chargeable under this Act.
M/S M3M India Pvt Ltd & Anr Vs Dr Dinesh Sharma & Anr (Delhi High Court) Judgment in Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. constitutes the law declared by the Supreme Court under Article 141 of the Constitution, even in respect of the question raised in these […]
Demanding details pertaining to the bank account of a person and of remittances made to the Income Tax Department towards discharge of tax liability shall amount to infringement of Right to Privacy, therefore, assessee was not bound to furnish their income tax returns and the bank account statements, as a condition for continuing the petroleum retail dealership granted to them.
Challenge to Constitutional Validity of Section 115BBDA of the Act in the Hon’ble Supreme Court In a Petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity of Section 115BBDA [Tax on Dividend income above Rs. 10 Lakhs] of the Act, the Hon’ble Supreme Court granted liberty to file SLP against […]
We noted that in the very first year i.e. AY 2011-12, the depreciation has already allowed the claim of depreciation. We noted that in the income tax code, there is a provision/ concept of block of asset and once any asset enters into block asset and claim of depreciation in very first year is allowed, in subsequent year the deprecation cannot be disallowed in case the first year is not
M/s. Neelkanth Plywood Pvt. Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Delhi) A perusal of the reasons for reopening of the case for the impugned assessment year, copy of which is placed at paper book page No. 20-21 shows that the reopening was made on the basis of the report of the investigation wing and there […]
