Darjeeling District of West Bengal, excluding Siliguri Sub-Division. 2. Kangra District, Punjab. 3. Mandi District, Himachal Pradesh. 4. Trivandrum District, Kerala. 5. Quilon District, Kerala. 6. Kottayam District of Kerala, excluding Meenachhil, Kanjirapally and Changanacherry Talukas. 7. Ernakulam District, Kerala. 8. Trichur District, Kerala. 9
Notification: S.O.1417 Association of Surgeons of India, Madras has been approved by the Indian Council of Medical Research, the prescribed authority, for the purposes of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961).
Explore CBDT Letter F. No. 12/19/64-IT(B) dated 22-2-1966, clarifying HRA exemption for Central Govt employees receiving flat-rate allowances. Learn about tax implications and pending amendments.
Notification: S.O.189 This notification contains amendments to Income-tax Rules carried out on 13th January, 1966 not reproduced here as it is already contained in the body of the rules itself
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (6) of section 88 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notifies Sri Nataraja Temple, Chidambaram, Madras State, to be of historic, archaeological and artistic importance for the purpose of the said section
It has been represented to the Board that in view of the difficulties faced by persons migrating from Burma to India, it may not be possible for a migrant from that country to lead the evidence necessary to prove his claim that a particular sum of money has been brought over by him from that country. 2. The Board consider that the case of bona fide migrants from Burma should be dealt with in a sympathetic manner. In their cases production of direct or documentary evidence in the shape of transfer through banks, hundies, etc., in support of remittance from Burma need not be insisted upon. However, with a view to ensure that unscrupulous persons do not abuse the concessions, the ITOs should ensure the satisfaction of the following conditions before accepting a claim of remittance from
On a representation made by the Gujarat Chamber of Commerce, the matter has been reconsidered by the Board in consultation with the Ministry of Law. Under section 271(1)(i) the penalty is to be 2 per cent of the tax, if any, payable by the assessee
On a representation made by the Gujarat Chamber of Commerce, the matter has been reconsidered by the Board in consultation with the Ministry of Law. Under s. 271(l)(a) of the IT Act, 1961, the penalty is to be 2 per cent of the tax, if any, payable by the assessee.
The decision of the Supreme Court was that where the sale was of the concern as a whole and a slump price was paid, no portion of this price was attributable to the stock-in-trade and, therefore, it was not possible to hold that there was a profit other than what resulted from the appreciation of capital. It follows, therefore, that where a business is sold as a going concern, the excess may not be a business profit, but will be capital gain chargeable to tax
All salaried persons having taxable income as per annual returns under section 206 should be taken on the G.I.R. However notices under section 139(2) or 147 are to be issued only to those persons who have not paid the tax correctly or who are believed to be having some source of income besides salary
