a
On Friday, 24 April 2015 10:37 PM, "'editor@itatonline.org' itatonline.org@gmail.com [aaykarbhavan]" <aaykarbhavan@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Dear Subscriber,
Kirit Dayabhai Patel vs. ACIT (Gujarat High Court)
S. 2711(1)(c): Immunity against penalty under Expl 5 is available even in return is not filed provided a statement is made during the search, explaining the manner of deriving the income and due tax & interest thereon is paid
In order to get the benefit of immunity under clause(2) of explanation5 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, it is not necessary to file the return before the due date provided that the assessee had made a statement, during the search and explained the manner in which the surrendered amount was derived, and paid tax as well as interest on the surrendered amount
Jupiter Corporation Services Limited vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
S. 255(4): Even if Third Member's verdict is shown to be "unsustainable in law and in complete disregard to binding judicial precedents", Division Bench has no choice but to give effect to it
At the time of giving effect to the majority view under section 255(4), it cannot normally be open to the Tribunal to go beyond the exercise of giving effect to the majority views, howsoever mechanical it may seem. In the case of dissenting situations on the division bench, the process of judicial adjudication is complete when the third member, nominated by Hon'ble President, resolves the impasse by expressing his views and thus enabling a majority view on the point or points of difference. What then remains for the division bench is simply identifying the majority view and dispose of the appeal on the basis of the majority views. In the course of this exercise, it is not open to the division bench to revisit the adjudication process and start examining the legal issues
CBDT Instruction On Claim Of DTAA Benefits By FIIs
It has come to the notice of the Board that several Foreign Institutional Investors receiving income from transactions in securities claim such income as exempt from tax under the Income-tax Act, 1961('the Act') by availing benefit provided in the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements ('DTAAs') signed between India and their respective countries of residence.
Regards,
Editor,
---------------------
Latest: ACIT vs. Ramila Pravin Shah (ITAT Mumbai)
Bogus purchases: Fact that suppliers names appear in the list of hawala dealers of the sales-tax dept and that assessee is unable to produce them does not mean that the purchases are bogus if the payment is through banking channels & GP ratio becomes abnormally high
__._,_.___
Posted by: deepak Kumar <deepakabc61@yahoo.in>
receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.
To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment