Telangana High Court held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India not invocable as adequate and effective alternative remedy under Section 144C of the Act by way of filing objections before the Dispute Resolution panel available to the petitioner.
ITAT Mumbai held that while computing notional rent, rent should be estimated on the basis of municipal rateable value.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the product MIRACULAN which primarily contains Traicontanol 0.05% by weight is a product under the category of Insecticides and cannot be considered as the plant growth regulator.
Order falls short of principle of natural of justice as admittedly SIB report, which is foundation was never supplied to petitioner, no hearing was granted to petitioner under section 75(4) of Act
ITAT Kolkata held that education cess and Secondary and higher Secondary Education cess being part of the tax is not allowable as deduction.
ITAT Cochin held that amendment to section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act made by the Finance Act 2020 is retrospective in nature. Accordingly, TDS deposited on or before the due date of filing return u/s 139(1) is allowable.
ITAT Chennai held that non-deduction of TDS and reversal of TDS deduction on interest payment on the basis of declaration in Form No. 15G/ 15H is justifiable.
HC held that alternative remedy will not operate as an absolute bar for entertaining the writ petition as jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter. Therefore, we are of the view that appellant has made out a case for entertaining this appeal and had also stayed the further reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, this writ petition is admitted for final hearing.
Ld. Sr. DR had raised an objection stating that issues relating to the ground of appeal taken in the present case falls under the exception clause contained in the said CBDT circular and, therefore, has to be heard on merit. To this effect, a report was called from the Ld. AO to make a submission as to how the present appeal is covered under the exception clause contained in the CBDT circular.
No addition could be made to an undisclosed contract receipt from the business of purchase and sale of fish as to some extent, the uniform rate of 8% available in Section 44AD applicable on some contractor was not to be applied on every time on every type of business. AO was directed to take an estimated income at 4% and credit of income disclosed by assessee was to be given
