Shri Rajev M. Bhingarde Vs Shri Hemant S. Shetye (Disciplinary Committee, ICSI) Disciplinary Committee after considered all the material on record, the nature of issues involved and in the totality of the circumstances of the case and the Respondent pleaded guilty only to the charge of not exercising due diligence in respect of notices for […]
In re The Maharashtra Rajya Sahakri Sang Maryadit (GST AAR Maharashtra) Question :- The Maharashtra Rajya Sahakari Sangh Ltd. conducts education and training programmers through its 13 co-operative training centres and 33 district co-operative boards by charging fees to participants. Maharashtra Rajya Sahakari Sangh Ltd. is not profit making body and doing this activity as […]
McDonald’s India case: Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 will not apply if no exempt income has been received or receivable during the previous year in question
There is no provision u/s.44BB to support the Assessing Officer’s interpretation of the so called ‘second leg contract’ so as to deny the applicability of the section to the assessee. Only requirement of the section is plant and machinery is given on hire is used or to be used in the prospecting /extraction/production of mineral oil. Thus the learned DRP upheld the applicability of Section 44BB.
Motorola Inc, USA appeal before Delhi ITAT: When no intangible material came to the notice of the AO to form the opinion that the income of the assessee company has escaped assessment and all the facts and figures have been brought on record by the assessee company during assessment proceedings and same had been explained: The reassessment proceedings were not sustainable, having been made after a period of 4 years from the relevant assessment years
S.R. Batliboi & Co. Vs ACIT (Calcutta High Court) Kelvinator of India Ltd. (supra) has held that, after April 1, 1989 the assessing officer invoking the provisions of Section 147 of the Act of 1961 must have tangible material to come to the conclusion that, there was escapement of income from assessment. Reasons must have a […]
Shri Ashok Jain Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) In the present case the assessee has not filed any wealth tax returns. The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Satya Narain Patni (supra) noted that the jewellery found during the search was within the limits prescribed by the CBDT circular and in the first instance, […]
As neither the assessment order nor the show cause notice stated the specific charge of alleged concealment and/or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income vis-a-vis addition made by AO, entire penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were vitiated.
CIT Vs Shri. Shaji thomas (Kerala High Court) Assessing Officer had accepted the fact that 97.60 Ares of land sold by the assessee is agricultural land. In fact, the said finding was also on proof of specific agricultural operations having been undertaken in the said The adjacent land which is lying as Kayal land and […]
Vidya Education Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The operative words in Section 23(1)(a) are the sum, for which, the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year. These words provide a specific direction to the Revenue for determining the fair rent. The A.O. having regard to the aforesaid provisions is expected to make […]
