HR Policy had not been finalized, the detailed norms including delegation of powers for discharge of GSTN functions was under preparation, the rules/regulations and manual etc. to be used by its employees for discharging their functions was also under preparation, the annual statement of accounts and balance sheet was available till the period 2013-2014 only and that it was reflected that on completion of manual, rules and regulations, recruitment etc.
M/s. Kshitij Interiors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) From the record we found that commission was paid to Mr. Bhawarlal Sharma, whole time Director of the Company, for the services rendered by him to the Company. The Director has rendered technical services to the assessee company. The commission so paid is for the services […]
CST Vs. M/s IPAN (CESTAT Delhi) The Revenue contends that various ‘media monitoring services’, arranging press conference, interviews, education workshop, contact programme, etc. will directly or indirectly have relationship to the enhancement of sales and promotion of the product/services of the client. We are not convinced with such reasoning proposed in the appeal. It is […]
The assessee further contended that additions cannot be made towards purchases merely on the basis of third party information ignoring the evidences filed to justify purchases. The assessee further contended before the lower authorities that the assessing officer neither pointed out any error or discrepancy in the books of account nor did make out any case of sales made outside the books of account.
Pr. CIT Vs. Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd. (Delhi High Court) The proposal to reopen an assessment under section 147 of the Act is to be based on reasons to be recorded by the assessing officer. Such reasons have to be communicated to the assessee. However, merely because the assessee participates in the proceedings pursuant to […]
DCIT Vs Shri Subhash Gandhi (ITAT Amritsar) An order passed u/s 127 of the Act is not appealable before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the first appellate authority has no jurisdiction to decide the validity or otherwise of an order passed u/s 127, transferring the jurisdiction from one Assessing Officer (AO) to another, it is, but, […]
V. Venkata Siva Kumar Vs Institute of Cost Accountants of India (Madras High Court) The petitioner seeks for a mandamus directing the first respondent to strictly comply with Sec 2(2) of Cost and Works Accountants Act 1959 as amended and desist from encroaching into the domains earmarked for the third respondent (Chartered Accountants) and further […]
M/s Global Agency Vs General Manger & Ors (Karnataka High Court) Unless a cause of action arises to the petitioner-assessee by an impugned action notice or order by the Respondents-Department, the academic questions raised by the petitioner-assessee cannot be determined under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition found to be premature […]
Remedy under section 264 could not be treated as regular remedy by passing regular remedy of appeals. Where assessee preferred petition under section 264 deliberately avoiding availing of regular remedy, it was rightly rejected and therefore, writ petition was to be dismissed.
Delhi High Court has refuses to set aside re-assessment notice U/s. 147/148 issued by Income Tax Department to the partnership firm Sky Light Hospitality, in which Robert Vadra is a partner, in connection with the DLF- Sky Light Hospitality land deal.
