Hon’ble HC did not find any merit in the ground of delay in issuance of notice. Court further remitted the matters ITAT to decide afresh on merits. In the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Calcutta Knitwears, particularly the contextual facts discussed
Whether CIT (A) has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal filed by assessee. Whether CIT (A) was right in sustaining the additions made by AO which are not applicable to the assessee.
Whether addition made by AO for undisclosed income of Rs 2,68,11,454/- is justifiable in view of the fact that assessee has rebutted onus cast of him with the help of information/ documents/evidence, which he could have made to support his claimed that he has not done any transaction with alleged party.
Punjab & Haryana High court held in CIT vs Shri Dinesh Verma that exemption u/s 54B could be claimed for short term & Long term assets because there was no such provision u/s 54B which denies exemption for short term assets.
Whether the amounts paid by the ONGC to the non-resident assessees /foreign companies for providing various services in connection with prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oil is chargeable to tax as fees for technical services under Section 44D read with Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act
Whether certain govt. agencies (ONGC) in agreement with foreign companies would entitle for the exemption of surtax under notification no. GSR 307 (E) dated 3.1983.
In view of the retrospective amendment introduced by Finance Act, 2010, the appellant were entitled to reverse the proportionate cenvat credit attributable to the quantum of input services used in or in relation to manufacture of exempted final product and by foregoing this credit
In the instant case, there was a reasonable cause in the assessee not mentioning the correct PANs in respect of a few deductees at the time of originally filing e-TDS quarterly statement of deduction of tax in Form No.26Q, which were in fact, not available with the assessee at the material time.
The reserve, which is required to be created under Section 45-IC, is out of the profits earned by a non-banking financial institution. It is not an amount diverted at source by overriding title. The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 can permit appropriation in respect of the said reserve.
The Revenue’s argument seems plausible and even logical because the Commissioner or a Chief Commissioner is unarguably ranked higher in authority than a Joint Commissioner. Yet at the same time
