Shri Srinivasa Reddy Yenumula Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) As regards the addition of Rs.18.00 lakhs towards unexplained investment is concerned, the learned Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Engg. & Construction Co. reported in (1972) 83 ITR 0187 wherein […]
Addition made under section 68 consequent to notice issued under section 153C was deleted because the AO had initiated assessment proceedings under section 153C for the relevant assessment years without pointing out or referring to any seized document belonging to those years and, therefore, there was no prima facierationale or logic behind issuing the said notice.
After issuing notice under section 153A revenue can carry out re-assessment or assessment with respect to the six immediate prior years and the year in which the search is carried out. This does not require any incriminating material recovered on search relating to those prior years; in which there is no time left, on the date of search, for an assessment under section 143.
Order of reassessment passed without disposing off the objection raised by assessee was invalid as assessee was entitled to raise objection against the reason given in reassessment notice and AO was under mandate to dispose of the same by a speaking order before proceeding to reassess the assessee’s income.
Shri Bhagwandas Nagla Vs ITO (International Taxation) (ITAT Hyderabad) Conclusion: TDS under section 195 was to be deducted in case payment for purchase of immovable property made to GPA (general power of attorney) holder of non-residents because, at best, GPA holder could be considered as only a conduit between assessee and the owners of property […]
Gain arising on transfer of ESOP options should be taxed as long term capital gains where the holding period was more than 3 years as assessee acquired a valuable and transferable right and the right of share constituted capital assets from the date of grant.
CESTAT Chennai has held that commission received/paid for issuance of corporate guarantee to associate/subsidiary companies is not exigible to service tax under Section 65(12)(a)(ix) of Finance Act, 1994.
Payment of high remuneration to Directors cannot be disallowed by treating the same as a tool to shift profits to evade tax when the Directors have already offered the income for tax through their personal returns.
Provision of section 50C is applicable as on the date of execution of sale agreement and accordingly the fair market value of the property as on the date of sale agreement is to be taken.
High Court in the case of assessee had held that by taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and punishment which was liable to be involved where assessee was indulged in issuing fake invoices without actual supply of goods with an intention to fraudulently avail the input tax credit, accused assessee’s were given anticipatory bail for the offence punishable under Section 137 of GST Act, 2017 subject to certain conditions.
