Shantam Bose Vs. Union of India (Kerala High Court) After the initiation of proceedings the petitioner was promoted to the post of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as per order dated 12.1.2012. According to him, the factum of his promotion to higher post is indicative of the fact that the official respondents are not considering the charges […]
In other words, the amount so incurred would be capitalized entitling the assessee to depreciation as per the eligible rate. The learned Members of the ITAT held that the facts of the instant case precisely fall within the ambit of Explanation 1 to section 32 and upheld the impugned order treating such amount as capital expenditure, eligible for depreciation.
Supreme Court has upheld Telangana High Court judgment in the case of P.V. Ramana Reddy Vs Union of India & Ors. that held that a person can be arrested by the competent authority in cases of Goods and Service Tax (GST) evasion.
As per Rule 120A of the CGST Rules, 2017 application for extending the time period for submitting the revised FORM GST TRAN-1 electronically has to be extended by the Commissioner and not by any other subordinate authority.
Receipt of capitation fee by educational institution and non-recording thereof by assessee, educational trust, in regular books of account was in total violation of section 13(1)(c) and, therefore, cancellation of registration under section 12AA was justified.
Best Cybercity (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (Delhi High Court) In the present case all the material that was necessary for the AO to form an opinion regarding the transaction involving the Assessee and PACL was already available with the AO. There was no fresh tangible material on the basis of which the AO could […]
ITO Vs M/s Smart Sensors & Transducers Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) As regards to set off of business loss against gain on sale of depreciable asset of factory building by the assessee, we find that the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Raj Shree Roadlines vs ITO (ITA No.1627/Mum/2012) for A.Y . […]
Expenditure on account of AMC for repairs and maintenance of computers installed at assessee’s office premises were payments of contractual nature without involving any technical or professional skill or knowledge. Therefore, TDS was rightly deducted by assessee under section 194C, instead of 194J.
Assessee has not produced any evidence before the authorities below regarding as to what services have been rendered by Shri Sarabjit Singh for the business of the assessee. No confirmation from Shri Sarabjit Singh was filed before the authorities below.
ITO Vs Sanjay Gurudasmal Chawla (ITAT Mumbai) We observe that the claim made by the assessee in the form of a letter and by way of revised computation of income in the course of the assessment proceedings was never entertained by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer has not gone into the claim at all. […]
