From the perusal of the complaint, it appears that with respect to the Assessment Year 1994-95 (Financial Year 1993-94), lesser tax liability was shown by the petitioners and, therefore, a prosecution has been launched against them by the Income Tax Department.
AO, having accepted the fact that identity of subscribers had been proved, could not have proceeded to make addition only on the basis of charging higher premium, because charging higher premium on issue of shares was a decision between parties and AO would not have any role to play as long as genuineness of transaction was not in doubt. Therefore, addition on mere suspicion under section 68 could not be sustained.
Since the booking of bare shell of a flat was a construction of house property and not purchase, therefore, the date of completion of construction was to be looked into which was as per provision of section 54, therefore, AO was directed to allow benefit to assessee as claimed u/s.54.
The Peerless General Finance And Investment Company Ltd. Vs CIT (Supreme Court of India) Receipts of subscriptions pursuant to collective investment schemes is to be treated as capital receipts even if it is shown as income in books of accounts Conclusion: Receipts of subscriptions in the hands of the assessee-company should be treated as capital […]
We note that the fact that neither the statement relied on by the authorities below were provided to the assessee nor any cross examination was allowed to prove the veracity of the statement. We note that the fact that in the statement of third party, the name of the assessee was not implicated. Even otherwise, according to Learned Counsel, no adverse inference could be drawn against the assessee on the basis of untested statements without allowing opportunity of cross-examination.
Swati Luthra Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Conclusion: Assessee had entered into genuine transaction of sale and purchase of shares and therefore, satisfied the conditions of Section 10(38) as no law prohibits purchase of shares in cash and it was the option of the buyer of shares to keep the shares either in Demat form or […]
Hetero Labs Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (Telangana High Court) Demand of duty and interest when delay on part of authorities processing necessary redemption certificate: The assessee was exempted from payment of customs duty by Notification No. 96/2009-Cus. subject to condition that evidence of discharge of export obligation was produced within sixty days of expiry of […]
Unutilized capital gain amount under Section 54 F[4] had to be charged under Section 45 as income of the previous year, after the expiry of three years from the date of sale of the capital asset as per proviso appended to Section 54F[4] and withdrawal of amount was permitted subject to deduction of tax.
In re M/s Machine Tools Corporation (GST AAR Punjab) What shall be the HSN/Tariff Classification & GST rate applicable on supply of bicycle frame lock to be fixed on Bicycle? Whether under Chapter Heading/ Sub-heading 8301 @ 18% or 8714@12%? M/s Machine Tools Corporation, 224-B, Industrial Estate, Link Road, Ludhiana, Punjab hereinafter referred to as […]
In re M/s Chadha Sugar & Industries Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Punjab) Whether ITC availed on one product can be utilised for payment of duty on other product, if applicant having two separate business activities under same GST number? M/s Chadha Sugars and Industries Limited, Vill. Kiri Afgana, Tehsil Batala, Distt. Gurdaspur, Punjab hereinafter referred […]
