ITAT Chennai held in the case of DCIT vs M/s. Sri Balasubramania Mills Ltd. that the section 148 could only be invoked whenever there is a failure on the side of Assessee to furnish all the necessary details. But, in this case the details were furnished as relevant sale deed was available with the AO
Punjab & Haryana High Court held in CIT Vs DSM Anti Infectives India ltd that the benchmark comparable which was used to compare with the comparable company that should be considered only of that year of which TP case was involved.
Punjab & Haryana High Court held In the case of CIT vs. M/s DSM Anti Infectives India Ltd. that the filter used by the TPO while selecting comparable is to select companies who are using Penicillin-G as raw material irrespective of the extent of usage of the same.
The assessee received revenue on account of the contract entered into with ONGC for providing services of seismic survey to the data correction supervision for the purpose of hydrocarbon reservoir exploitation, possible leak point identification and core site selection from available 2D and 3D seismic data, core acquisition with USBL System, sample processing, prevention and transportation, laboratories analysis and interpretation and report.
The Commissioner has not taken into consideration the details of processed fabrics received by SCM and AP& Sons and not considered the evidences relied by the department and also white papers bearing the signature of Shri C. Manikandan
Medravathi Agro Farms Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) It is observed that the assessee company as well as other thirteen land owning companies were incorporated with their main object to carry on the agricultural activities and there is no dispute about the same. In order to pursue this main objects, these companies purchased agricultural […]
Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pepsi Foods Private Limited vs. ACIT [W.P.(C) 1334/2015] pronounced on 19-05-2015 wherein the petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as ‘the Act’).
Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of The Jalandhar Iron and Steel Merchants Association(Regd), Jalandhar vs State of Punjab has held that the State Government did not have power to legislate Rule 21(8) of Punjab VAT Rules, 2005 before 01.04.2014 so as to restrict ITC on stock of iron and steel goods as existing on the date of reduction of tax on such goods.
Calcutta High Court held In the case of The CIT vs. M/s Carrier Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration that provision for warranty based on personal experience and past trends is an allowable expenditure. The division bench judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Majestic Auto Ltd.
The High Court held that the assessee was bound to get its accounts audited under section 64 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, and the delay in audit by the auditor appointed under the Act was not attributable to the assessee.
