Connect us       New User?     Subscribe Now
Confirm your Email ID for Updates
20-08-2010 - Recent Updates as on 20.08.2010
Saturday, August 21, 2010

1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III Vs. PATEL FIELD MARSHAL  INDUSTRIES [HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT ] - The Questions raised in the appeal are Whether, on the facts and in the   circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in  deleting the addition of Rs.28,66,529/- made by the Assessing Officer and  confirmed by the Appellate Commissioner by disallowing expenses being `export  expenditure'? Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the   Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting Rs.1,30,000/- by  disallowing administrative expenses made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed  by the Appellate Commissioner? etc. Held   it cannot be stated that the impugned  order of the Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity so as to warrant  interference.
(Click here for judgment)

  

2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I  Vs. ADITYA MEDISALES LTD - Appellant-revenue has proposed the following question: Whether, on the  facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law   in confirming the order of the CIT(A) deleting the disallowance made on account  of excess interest payment for Rs.56,63,131/- in view of section 40A(2)(a) of the  Act? Held In absence of any question of law, much less substantial question  of law, the appeal is dismissed.
(Click here for judgment)

   

3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I Vs HIMATSU BIMET LTD - The appellant revenue has proposed the questions in relation to the Assessment  Year 1997-98: Whether on the facts, in the circumstances of the case and in law,  the Appellate Tribunal erred in deleting the addition of Rs.81,07,000/- made by  the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained share application money, and  confirmation of the same by the CIT(A) holding categorically that the assessee  had despite several opportunities given, failed to substantiate the claim before the  Assessing Officer in the assessment proceedings, before the CIT(A) himself and  even in course of remand proceedings before the Assessing Officer and thus,  whether the order of the Appellate Tribunal is perverse in ignoring the  overwhelming evidence altogether? Held it cannot be said that the impugned  order of the Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity so as to warrant  interference.
(Click here for judgment)

What's New 

a. Take expert view on TDS on port charges, SC tells CBDT (Click for detail)

b. There is no prohibition for claiming any deduction under section 80HHC while applying benefits provided under section 10A (Click for detail) 

c. Merely because a judgment has been rendered, the same cannot be a ground for reopening assessment under section 147 (Click for detail)

"The will to conquer is the first condition of victory"

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,
kapilnkgoelandco@gmail.com

 
CA. Sidharth Jain, Co-Moderator
sidhjasso@yahoo.com 
  
CA. Mukesh K Bansal, Co-Moderator-FEMA
Mob:9540022533,
mukbansal80@gmail.com 

   

« Back
 
Online Poll
Connect Us       New User?     Subscribe Now