-
Please deposit employees’ contribution deducted on or before the due date otherwise the right to claim such sums as allowable deduction while computing the income was lost forever. Income Tax Act, 1961. Sections 36(1)(va), 43B – Very important Hon’ble Supreme Court decision on October 12, 2022
-
Q Can condonation of delay in filing appeal be acceded without a written request? The Hon’ble ITAT, Agra passed the order in the similar circumstances in the case of Netra Pal Singh v. Asstt. CIT on dated 23 April 2003 vide IT(SS)A No. 89/Del/1997 Block period 1985-86 to 1995-96
-
No interference is required to be made in the issue of notice under old provisions of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act extended uptill 30th day of June, 2021. The petition of the assessee is dismissed by Chhattisgarh High Court on 23/08/2021 in the case of Palak Khatuja Vs Union Of India
-
Section 40(a)(ia), 194C: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA held on Jul 29, 2020 that the provisions of Section 194C were indeed applicable and the assessee-appellant was under obligation to deduct the tax at source in relation to the payments made by it for hiring the vehicles for the purpose of its business of transportation of goods. Against the assessee.SHREE CHOUDHARY TRANSPORT COMPANY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
-
Section 153C- Supreme Court of India on on 5 March, 2020 Before issuing notice under Section 153C of the Act, the Assessing Officer of the searched person must be “satisfied” that, inter alia, any document seized or requisitioned “belongs to” a person other than the searched person. If the satisfaction note recorded under Section 153C of the Act in respect of the assessee, i.e., a third party, hold invalid entire proceedings taken there under is null and void. However, in the case where the Assessing Officer of the searched person and the other person is the same, it is sufficient by the Assessing Officer to note in the satisfaction note that the documents seized from the searched person belonged to the other person i.e; the assessee. In the case of M/S. Super Malls Private Limited. vs PCIT. AY 2008-09
-
Section 2(14): Income earned by the assessee constitute business income not Long Term Capital Gains reason that the assessee has always shown it as closing stock of agricultural land in the balance sheets and the object is of property business. Following contention of the assessee was not accepted the land is always valued at cost, period of holding for 13 years, accepting by deptt for deriving of agricultural income from the land. KOHLI ESTATES PVT. LTD. vs. ITO ITAT DELHI on May 5, 2020 AY 2011-12.
-
Section 32, 37, 36(1)(iii), 37(1), 131, 133A, 56, 147 AY 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 After going through the various terms of the deed if it is loan/finance arrangement between the parties then the assessee is entitled only to claim interest as expenditure u/s 36 (1) (iii) and depreciation and is not entitled to claim the principal component of alleged lease rent paid as ‘revenue expenditure’ u/s 37(1). FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD. vs. ACIT ITAT CHANDIGARH May 6, 2020
-
Kindly note Supreme Court in Vodafone Idea on 29th April 2020 held that there is assessment year wise regime in processing of refund u/s 143(1)
-
Supreme court on 24th April, 2020 held that clause (f) in Section 43B of the 1961 Act is constitutionally valid and therefore any sum payable by the assessee as an employer in lieu of any leave at the credit of his employee is allowable only on actual payment. Division Bench of High Court at Calcutta order is reversed.
-
ITAT CHENNAI held on Mar 13, 2020 Disallowance of interest is valid when out of borrowed funds the assessee advanced interest free loan to subsidiary concern without commercial expediency.