Mundra House, 822-A, Shivaju Nagar, Civil Lines, jaipur-302006 9314501680, 9314501791

B.P.Mundra

मानवता से काम करें मन के सारे काम अपने आप हो जायेंगे

इस महीने के इम्पोर्टेंट काम
  • Home
  • GST
  • Cases Income tax
  • MCA
  • Subsidy
  • TDS
  • About Us
  • contact us
  • Login
    • Admin Login
    • Staff Login
    • User Login
  • Loan
  • Apply for job
  • Click Here
  • HOW TO
  • To file ITR for AY 2022-23 kindly give details (and also evidence if yes) of following
  • Categories
    • Articles
    • Authority
    • Benami Transactions (Prohibition)
    • client
    • Constitution of India
    • Finance Act 1994
    • formalities to be completed
    • GST
    • Happiness
    • HOW TO
    • Income Tax
    • Indian Evidence Act 1872
    • Job Application
    • MCA
    • Office system
    • Papers required for filing
    • Principal of mutuality
    • rajasthan public trust
    • Smile
    • Subsidy
    • work report

Author Archive: admin

B.P.Mundra > Articles by: admin

On 26th Oct, 2018 INDORE TRIBUNAL held that if the assessee has already ‎purchased a new house within the stipulated period and as such is entitled to the ‎deduction u/s.54F even though the assessee failed to deposit entire sale ‎consideration scheme of deposits in capital gains account on or before due ‎date of filing its return of income.‎

Loading

On 26th Oct, 2018 INDORE TRIBUNAL held that if the assessee has already ‎purchased a new house within the stipulated period and as such is entitled to the ‎deduction u/s.54F even though the assessee failed to deposit entire sale ‎consideration…
Read more

139, 139(1), 139(4), 54, 54F, 54F(4), Indore Tribunal

November 16, 2019

Assessee can fulfil the requirement of s. 54 of depositing the unutilised ‎portion of the capital gain on sale of residential property in notified ‎scheme upto the expiry of time-limit for filing return under s. 139(4). ‎From a plain reading of sub-s. (2) of s. 54, it is clear that only s. 139 is ‎mentioned in s. 54(2) in the context that the unutilised portion of the ‎capital gain on the sale of property used for residence should be ‎deposited before the date of furnishing the return of the income-tax ‎under s. 139. Sec. 139 cannot be meant only as s. 139(1) but it means ‎all sub-sections of s. 139. ‎

Loading

Assessee can fulfil the requirement of s. 54 of depositing the unutilised ‎portion of the capital gain on sale of residential property in notified ‎scheme upto the expiry of time-limit for filing return under s. 139(4). ‎From a plain reading…
Read more

139, 139, 139(1), 139(4), 54, 54(2)

November 16, 2019

On 26th Oct 2018 AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL held that Action u/s 263 can be justified ‎only when twin condition is fulfilled as held by The Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT ‎Vs. Shri D.G. Gopala Gowda i.e. assessment order should be erroneous and it should ‎cause a prejudice to the Revenue. In the instant case Assessee argued the moment ‎addition on account of disallowance of the deprecation would be made to the assessee’s ‎income, it will be allowed as deduction u/s80IA/80IC. Therefore, order of the ‎Commissioner is not sustainable on this issue.

Loading

On 26th Oct 2018 AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL held that Action u/s 263 can be justified ‎only when twin condition is fulfilled as held by The Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT ‎Vs. Shri D.G. Gopala Gowda i.e. assessment order…
Read more

263-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue, Ahmedabad Tribunal

November 16, 2019

Penny Stock – On Oct 24, 2018 KOLKATA TRIBUNAL held that Addition ‎made u/s 68 solely on the basis of general report of the investigation wing, Kolkata and ‎accordingly the action of the ld AO was based purely on surmises and suspicions. There ‎is no finding by the ld AO that the transactions were between related parties. Further the ‎concerned scrip was not suspended by SEBI either at the time of transaction of allotment ‎of shares to the assessee or sale of shares by the assessee.‎

Loading

Penny Stock – On Oct 24, 2018 KOLKATA TRIBUNAL held that Addition ‎made u/s 68 solely on the basis of general report of the investigation wing, Kolkata and ‎accordingly the action of the ld AO was based purely on surmises…
Read more

68, Penny stock

November 16, 2019

सर्वे के दौरान अगर आप ने कोई आय सरेंडर करते समय यह लिखा कि यह आय इनकम फ्रॉम बिजनेस एंड प्रोफेशन से है तो यह आय इनकम फ्रॉम बिजनेस एंड प्रोफेशन स्की मानी जाएगी एवं प्रॉफिट एंड लॉस अकाउंट में इनकम सरेंडर के रूप में दर्शाई जाएगी और पूरा प्रॉफिट एंड लॉस अकाउंट निकाला जाएगा लेकिन यहीं आय आपने इनकम फ्रॉम अदर सोर्सेज बताइ तो यह आय इनकम फ्रॉम अदर सोर्सेस मानी जाएगी। कृपया ध्यान रखें इसका बहुत फर्क पड़ता है

Loading

सर्वे के दौरान अगर आप ने कोई आय सरेंडर करते समय यह लिखा कि यह आय इनकम फ्रॉम बिजनेस एंड प्रोफेशन से है तो यह आय इनकम फ्रॉम बिजनेस एंड प्रोफेशन स्की मानी जाएगी एवं प्रॉफिट एंड लॉस अकाउंट में…
Read more

133A, 263-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue, 69A-Unexplained money, Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Section 263, Unexplained Money-Sec 69A

November 16, 2019

मित्रों 24 अक्टूबर 2018 को विशाखापट्टनम ट्रिब्यूनल ने फैसला देते हुए कहा कि आयकर आयुक्त अपील एकदम नए सोर्स में एडिशन यह कह कर नहीं कर सकता कि आयकर अधिकारी ने इसकी जांच पूरी नहीं की है इसके लिए आयकर प्रोविजन में ही धारा 147 148 263 154 समुचित रूप से उपलब्ध है

Loading

मित्रों 24 अक्टूबर 2018 को विशाखापट्टनम ट्रिब्यूनल ने फैसला देते हुए कहा कि आयकर आयुक्त अपील एकदम नए सोर्स में एडिशन यह कह कर नहीं कर सकता कि आयकर अधिकारी ने इसकी जांच पूरी नहीं की है इसके लिए आयकर…
Read more

Uncategorized

November 16, 2019

TO CONVERT A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY TO LLP

Loading

TO CONVERT A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY TO LLP NO INCOME TAX ‎1.‎ Section 47(xiiib)‎ Transactions not regarded as transfer.‎ Nothing contained in section 45 shall apply to the following transfers:—‎ i)‎ ‎————-‎ ‎(xiiib) ‎ any transfer of a capital asset…
Read more

47(xiiib), 47A, client

November 16, 2019

ट्रिब्यूनल के द्वारा सेट एसाइड ऑर्डर को डिपार्टमेंटल रिप्रेजेंटेटिव के द्वारा लिए गए फाइनेंसियल ईयर के अगले फाइनेंसियल ईयर में 31 दिसंबर तक ऑर्डर किया जा सकता है बाद में नहीं

Loading

मित्रों, हाई कोर्ट ऑफ़ दिल्ली ने 1 अक्टूबर 2018 को फैसला दिया की लिमिटेशन पीरियड की शुरुआत उस दिन से होगी जिस दिन डिपार्टमेंटल रिप्रेजेंटेटिव ऑर्डर की कॉपी ले ले। अगर कोई jurisdiction चेंज हुआ है तो वहां डिपार्टमेंटल का…
Read more

153, 153(2A), 153A, 153B, 158BB, Cases Income tax

November 16, 2019

Appeal filed manually instead of online. Proper opportunity should be allowed to file online.

Loading

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘State of Punjab Vs. Shyamalal Murari and others reported in AIR 1976 (SC) 1177’ has categorically held that courts should not go strictly by the rulebook to deny justice to the deserving litigant…
Read more

249(1), Appeal to file online

November 16, 2019

Appeal filed manually in time but online filed with delay. It was held that delay was occasioned due to technical ‎issue and lack of knowledge regarding the duly introduced e-filing procedure and being first time. So it was directed to the learned ‎Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits after condoning the ‎delay

Loading

IN THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH N.K. SAINI, A.M. & AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.‎ Gurinder Singh Dhillon v. ITO ITA No.6595/Del/2016‎ ‎19 April, 2017‎ Assessee by: Deepak Thakkar, CA Revenue by: Anil Kumar Sharma, Senior Departmental Representative ORDER N. K. Saini, A.M.‎…
Read more

249(1), Appeal to file online

November 16, 2019

Post navigation

← Previous 1 … 34 35 36 37 38 … 52 Next →

Categories

  • 1860 (1)
  • 1956 (1)
  • 1973 (1)
  • 2002 (1)
  • 2013 (1)
  • Articles (78)
  • Authority (1)
  • Benami Transactions (Prohibition) (1)
  • client (59)
  • Code of Criminal Procedure (0)
  • Companies Act (2)
  • Constitution of India (2)
  • Cr.P.C. (2)
  • Due dates (1)
  • Finance Act 1994 (0)
  • formalities to be completed (6)
  • GST (59)
  • Happiness (4)
  • HOW TO (47)
  • HUF Property (1)
  • Income Tax (307)
  • Indian Evidence Act 1872 (1)
  • Indian Penal Code (1)
  • invalid notice (1)
  • Job Application (0)
  • MCA (3)
  • Notice 148 (0)
  • Office system (9)
  • Papers required for filing (6)
  • PMLA Act (1)
  • Prevention of Money Laundering Act (1)
  • Principal of mutuality (1)
  • rajasthan public trust (2)
  • Smile (7)
  • Subsidy (5)
  • work report (2)

    • Archives

    • January 2025
    • July 2024
    • October 2023
    • September 2023
    • July 2023
    • April 2023
    • March 2023
    • February 2023
    • January 2023
    • December 2022
    • October 2022
    • September 2022
    • August 2022
    • July 2022
    • June 2022
    • May 2022
    • April 2022
    • March 2022
    • February 2022
    • January 2022
    • December 2021
    • November 2021
    • September 2021
    • August 2021
    • July 2021
    • June 2021
    • May 2021
    • April 2021
    • March 2021
    • February 2021
    • January 2021
    • December 2020
    • November 2020
    • October 2020
    • September 2020
    • August 2020
    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • December 2019
    • November 2019

    Recent Posts

    • Rectify the filed GSTR-1 return in order to get ITC benefit
    • Whether claim of exemption under section 54F is allowable for capital gain on sale of shares which was sold in lieu of plot and construction and thereafter assessee made further payment towards remaining construction. The permission of transfer of property was not obtained in the time period as available in section 54F. ITAT KOLKATA allowed the deduction u/s 54F in the case of Basabdutta Dutta v. ITO vide IT APPEAL NO. 868 (KOL.) OF 2023 [AY 2014-15] on dated 11.07.2024. FCA BPMUNDRA 9314501680
    • CASH DEPOSITED DURING DEMONETISATION PROPERLY RECORDED IN BOOKS. DISALLOWANCE DELETED FCA BPMUNDRA 9314501680
    • Can AO made the addition ignoring the claim of the assessee that the cash withdrawn from the bank was available with the assessee for the deposit in the bank account?Section 69A
    • Can invocation of revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 by CIT is sustainable by holding the assessment order as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue in respect of issue which was not a reason for selection of the case for limited scrutiny?