The assessee has not adduced any evidence that drawings made by the Directors through their personal credit card are in fact, incurred for the purpose of business of the company. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Swan Silk (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-12(3), Bengaluru ALOK ARADHE AND HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, JJ. IT APPEAL NO. 1033 OF 2017… Read More »
HIGH COURT OF DELHI Harbux Singh Sidhu v. Department of Income-tax MANMOHAN AND NAVIN CHAWLA, JJ. W.P.(C) NO. 6683 OF 2021 JULY 19, 2021 Aakash Khattar and Gaurav Gupta, Advs. for the Peitioner. Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Sr. Standing Counsel, Virender Pratap Singh Charak, Ms. Shubhra Parashar and Pushpender Singh Charak, Advs. for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Manmohan, J – The petition has been heard by way of video… Read More »
Notice issued under Section 148 under old provisions of income tax after 31.03.2021 is valid High Court held as under 130 Taxheal.com 44 As per Finance Act 2021 , Notice can be issued under Section 148A w.e.f 01.04.2021. But notice was issued under Section 148 old provisions on 30.06.2021. The pandemic and lock down prevailed… Read More »
No Show Cause Notice is required to be issued for making addition under section 68 of Income Tax Act : The first argument of the appellant is that no show cause notice was issued before the addition was made by resorting to Section 68 of the Act. The statutory provision does not specifically state that… Read More »
iPad is not a computer, IN THE ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH Kohinoor Indian (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1 LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. M.L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT APPEAL NOS. 234 & 316 (ASR) OF 2017 [ASSESSMENT YEARS 2012-13 & 2013-14] AUGUST 16, 2021 Sandeep Vijh, CA for the Appellant. Smt. Ratinder Kaur, DR. for the… Read More »
In any case, even if two-three queries out of forty five queries are found to be unwarranted, as sought to be submitted by Mr.Soparkar, the entire order giving directions can not be set aside treating it to be a nullity. In that view of the matter, both the petitions being devoid of merits deserve to be dismissed.… Read More »
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-1(1) v. Daimler India Commercial Vehicles (P.) Ltd. N. KIRUBAKARAN AND P. VELMURUGAN, JJ. WRIT APPEAL NO.1616 OF 2018 & OTHS. AUGUST 19, 2021 Mrs. Hema Muralikrishnan, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Appellant. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Counsel and N.P. Vijay Kumar for the Respondent. Download Judgment Click here
the assessee has made payments subsequently, but, not utilised the capital gain amount lying in the capital gain account scheme before the specified date. Therefore, the action of the ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition in my opinion is justified. The various decisions relied on by the ld. counsel for the assessee are distinguishable and not… Read More »
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS R.S.Suriya v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2, Chennai S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J. W.P. NO. 31785 OF 2018 AUGUST 4, 2021 S. Raveekumar for the Petitioner. A.P. Srinivas, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The lis on hand is instituted questioning the legal sustainability of the rejection order passed by the first respondent with reference to… Read More »
IN THE ITAT KOLKATA BENCH ‘SMC’ Ashutosh Jha v. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(5), Ranchi SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT APPEAL NO. 188 (RANCHI) OF 2019 [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15] APRIL 30, 2021 Smt. Chinmaya Aurangabadkar, JCIT, Sr. DR for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30-10-2018 of the… Read More »