Services provided by Indian tour operators to foreign tourists during the period 1st July 2012 to 1st July 2017, which has been paid for in convertible foreign exchange would not be amenable to service tax.
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XX, Kolkata dated 28.08.2014. Assessment was framed by ACIT, Range-3, Kolkata u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) vide his order dated 11.01.2013 for assessment year 2007-08. The grounds raised by the Revenue per its appeal are as under
Depreciation on right to collect toll being infrastructure and not on toll road, where cost incurred for development and construction of infrastructure facility was a right in nature of intangible asset falling within purview of section 32(1)(ii). Order of AO in amortizing expenditure over period of facility and allowing the same was reversed. AO was, thus, directed to allow claim of assessee vis-a-vis depreciation on intangible asset under section 32(1)(ii).
Definition of legal representative given in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is inclusive in character and its scope is wide. It is not confined to legal heirs only. It may be a person who may or may not be the heir, competent to inherit the property of the deceased.
We direct the Union of India, Ministry of Information and Technology in consultation with E-Committee of this Court to lay down technical specifications and other modelities, including price range and sources of supply for installation of CCTV cameras in Courts.
The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand has been confirmed against them on the allegation of clandestine removal of goods, on the basis of statement given by Shri. Kishore Aggarwal one of the appellant here, and the data retrieved from the Laptop of Shri Lalit Aggarwal and Shri. Vikas Varshney, […]
The short grievance in this petition is under the GST the petitioner has been registered as sole proprietor in place of a partnership firm. In the short counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents no. 1 to 4 in paragraph 11 it has been stated that the Joint commissioner (IT) in the office of the […]
If intention of Parliament was to include HUF prior to the said date then the amendment would have been carried out in respect of section 54B as well along with section 54. Therefore, amended provisions of section 54B were not applicable retrospectively and assessee-HUF was not entitled to exemption for the year under consideration.
Service by post, which had been returned with the endorsement addressee not found, followed by an attempt at personal service and subsequent affixture would constitute substantial compliance of section 282
Delhi High Court has held in the case of Systra Sa Project Office Vs Dispute Resolution Panel that action of the DRP in providing only 3 days time to file a long list of documents and later on refusing to take them on record is against principles of natural justice.
