The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (supra), has held that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders whose names are given to the AO then the department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessment in accordance with law but it cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the assessee company.
It is a fact that the assessee is not required to prove the source of source of the amount found credited in the accounts of loan creditors as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dwarik Dwarikadhish Investment (P.) Ltd. (supra) and CIT vs. Diamond Products Ltd. (supra).
The Assessing Officer as well as Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) has failed to determine the correctly the hawala Income. The appellant has issued Bills i.e. Sales Bills to the commercial world i.e. the needy persons. Who has paid the appellant the Hawala Commission.
The Supreme Court today advocated in the case of JAIPUR SHAHAR HINDU VIKAS SAMITI TR.PRES Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN TR.CHIEF SEC.& ORS. that judiciary should deal with iron hand the misuse of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which is being exploited for the benefit of individuals.
The Supreme Court has held in the case of ASSO.OF UNIFIED TELE.SERV.PROV.& ORS. Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4591 OF 2014, Date of Decision 17.04.2014 that Pvt firms including telecom Companies come in CAG ambit.
In the present case, the appellant claimed for 730 days of CCL at a stretch to ensure success of her son in the forthcoming secondary/senior examinations (10th/11th standard). It is not in dispute that son was minor below 18 years of age when she applied for CCL.
In a historic move, the Supreme Court on Tuesday granted legal recognition to transgenders as ‘third gender’ as a mandate of social justice in response to writy filed by National Legal Services Authority . The apex court ordered the Centre and the states to recognise transgenders as a class apart from male and female.
Under Section 234E wef 1st of July 2012 deductor will be liable to pay by way of fee of Rs 200 per day till the failure to file TDS statement continues, However, the total fee cannot exceed the amount of TDS deductible for which statement was required to be filed.
It is submitted by Sri Amitabh Thakur that the conduct rules applicable to Government servant including the All India Services (Conduct) Rules 1968, do not require him to obtain permission of the State Government, to file petition in public interest.
The assessee contended that the expenditure under the said claims are only for promotion of sales and hence had no relation to payment of any commission on sales. The assessee contended that therefore tax at source is not required to be deducted as the said expenditure did not fell within the ambit of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.
