C I T V Hariram Bhambhani Bomaby High Court
PFA
Unaccounted Sales: The entire unaccounted sales cannot be assessed as undisclosed income particularly if the purchases have been accounted for. Only the net profit on such unaccounted sales can be taken as income
The CIT(A) and Tribunal have came to the concurrent finding that the purchases have been recorded and only some of the sales are unaccounted. Thus, in the above view, both the authorities held that it is not the entire sales consideration which is to be brought to tax but only the profit attributable on the total unrecorded sales consideration which alone can be subject to income tax. The view taken by the authorities is a reasonable and a possible view
PFA
 | Case Law: CIT vs. Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd (Bombay High Court)by Santosh Kumar Agarwal |
S. 263: Fact that assessment order is silent on a point does not mean that there is no application of mind by AO if he has raised a query during the assessment proceedings and assessee has replied
This Court in the case of "Idea Cellular Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors., [(2008) 301 ITR 407 (Bom.)]" has held that if a query is raised during assessment proceedings and responded to by the assessee, the mere fact that it is not dealt with in the assessment Order would not lead to a conclusion that no mind had been applied to it Read more of this post
Santosh Kumar Agarwal | May 15, 2015 at 10:24 AM | Tags: CIT vs. Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd (Bombay High Court), S. 263: Fact that assessment order is silent on a point does not mean that there is no application of mind by AO if he has raised a query during the assessment proceedings and assessee has replied | Categories: Case Law | URL: http://wp.me/p2e8mQ-1jp
| Comment | See all comments |
PFA
| | Case Law: CIT vs. State Bank Of India (Bombay High Court)by Santosh Kumar Agarwal |
Uniformity in treatment is the basis premise of rule of law. The Dept cannot arbitrarily pick and choose which orders of the ITAT should be challenged in the High Court. If ITAT has followed an order which is not challenged by the Dept then an affidavit must be filed explaining the distinguishing features which warrants the different view
When the Revenue challenges the order of the Tribunal which in turn relies upon another decision rendered by it on the same issue, then in cases where the Revenue has accepted the order by not preferring any Appeal against the earlier order, the Revenue should not challenge the subsequent order on the same issue. In case an appeal is preferred from the subsequent order, then the Memo of appeal must indicate the reasons as to why an appeal is being preferred in later case when no appeal was preferred from the earlier order of the Tribunal which has merely been followed in the later case. In any case, the Officer concerned must atleast file an Affidavit before the matter comes up for admission, pointing out distinguishing features in the present case from the earlier case, warranting a different view in case the appeal is being pressed Read more of this post
Santosh Kumar Agarwal | May 15, 2015 at 10:26 AM | Tags: CIT vs. State Bank Of India (Bombay High Court), Uniformity in treatment is the basis premise of rule of law. The Dept cannot arbitrarily pick and choose which orders of the ITAT should be challenged in the High Court. If ITAT has followed an order | Categories: Case Law | URL: http://wp.me/p2e8mQ-1js
| Comment | See all comments |
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment