1.   THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. M/S K.S. CONDUIT, I.T.A. NO. 37 OF 2002, DATE OF DECISION: 14.10.2010, HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA. 

Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in holding that provision of section 145(2) are not applicable to block assessments especially when section 158BH specifically states that save as otherwise provided in this Chapter, all other provisions of the Act shall apply to assessment made under this chapter? 

There is an express amendment to Section 158 BC(b) by Finance Act, 2002, applicable w.e.f. 1.7.1995 making Section 145(2) of the Act applicable to block assessment. 

(Please click here for judgment) 

2.   K.K. KANSAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, I.T.A. NO. 157 OF 2004, DATE OF DECISION: 13.10.2010, HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA. 

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, in the absence of any direction in the assessment order for levy of interest under Section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer could charge such interest while computing the tax liability? 

That levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C of the Act is mandatory. Mere non-mention of levy of interest in the order of assessment cannot render the said statutory provision nugatory. The interest being mandatory and not discretionary, the recovery thereof does not depend on the language of the assessment order. 

(Please click here for judgment) 

What's New 

a.   Notification of ext. of due date for DVAT-51  (Click for detail)

b.   MCA on Converged Accounting Standards  (Click for detail)

c.   MCA Revised (Increased) Additional Fees  (Click for detail)

d.   SEZ-71-2010-Clarification on Inst No. 49 on FTWZ issues  (Click for detail) 

e.   Notification No. 96/2010-Customs (N.T.)  (Click for detail)

f.   Apex court asks Vodafone to deposit Rs. 2,500 crore  (Click for detail)