1.   CIT vs M/s Haryana Tourism Corporation Ltd.-P & H HC:

Consistency on Revenue’s Part: “The principle of consistency laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT(2004) 266 ITR 99, CIT v.J.K.Charitable Trust (2009) ISCC 196 and C.K.Gangadharan v. CIT(2008) SCC 739 would guide us that once similar proposition has beenaccepted by the revenue in respect of assessment year 1997-98, then it is not open to it to challenge a similar finding and deviate from its earlier stand..”

(Click here for judgment)

    

2.   CIT vs M/s Punjab State Warehousing Corporation-P & H HC:

Consistency: “Having heard the learned counsel we are of the considered view that once the factual position is similar in respect of the earlier assessment years, for the disputed assessment year 2003-04 no different view could be taken. We find that categorical findings of fact have been recorded in that regard which cannot be re-opened especially when there is no change of circumstance warranting a different view..”

(Click here for judgment)

  

3.   CIT vs Sh. Naveen Chander- P & H HC:

“Service of Notice Affixture: Held The Tribunal had taken the view that registered AD letter was received back unserved and thereafter service was sought to be affected by affixation which was required to be done in accordance with the procedure laid down by Order V Rule 20 of the Code. These are necessarily findings of fact coupled with the finding on law that requirement of Order V Rule 20 of the Code were not complied with.

Therefore, we find that no question of law much less a substantive question of law would arise for determination of this Court. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.”

(Click here for judgment)

  

4.   CIT vs M/s Elbit Medical Diagnostics Ltd.- Kar. HC:

Classification of Payment made to Directors sitting for long time in company premises: HELD not sufficient to conclude that TDS should be made u/s 192

Alleging there is employer-employee relationship and not independent relationship (covered u/s 194J)…

(Click here for judgment)

  

5.   M/s Poonja Arcade vs ACIT- Kar. HC:

Reopening : Section 150/Unlimited reopening r.w Section 153: when tribunal has given sufficient indication and has made sufficient observations to enable AO to reassess the tax liability…it was correct to reopen the case u/s 150 (appeal effect etc)…

Other rulings gist would be sent later (are: a) Bombay High COurt on Penalty & Wealth tax & Gujarat High Court on reopening; 271D/269SS - Journal entries; 36(1)iii etc...)

(Click here for judgment) 

  

    

 What's New 

a.   New Companies Bill will equate CS with CEO and CFO: ICSI president

b.   Tax evasion suspects to get respite from penalty

c.   Still waiting for your I-T refund? Try out an RTI

 

(Click here) for Team Voice of CA Chapters detail.

      

If you have any query please e-mail at voiceofca@gmail.com  

 

"Success is not the key to happiness. Happiness is the key to success. If you love what you are doing, you will be successful"

 

Thanks for your valuable time

"Voice of CA"

CA. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, Founder - Voice of CA

Member  Central Council - ICAI  (Former Chairman - NIRC)

Mob : 9811080342, agarwal.s.ca@gmail.com

CA. Kapil Goel, Moderator-Direct Taxes, Mob:9910272806, cakapilgoel@gmail.com

CA. Sidharth Jain, Co-Moderator, sidhjasso@yahoo.com

CA. Mukesh K Bansal, Co-Moderator-FEMA, mkak@rediffmail.com