Mundra House, 822-A, Shivaju Nagar, Civil Lines, jaipur-302006 9314501680, 9314501791

B.P.Mundra

मानवता से काम करें मन के सारे काम अपने आप हो जायेंगे

इस महीने के इम्पोर्टेंट काम
  • Home
  • GST
  • Cases Income tax
  • MCA
  • Subsidy
  • TDS
  • About Us
  • contact us
  • Login
    • Admin Login
    • Staff Login
    • User Login
  • Loan
  • Apply for job
  • Click Here
  • HOW TO
  • To file ITR for AY 2022-23 kindly give details (and also evidence if yes) of following
  • Categories
    • Articles
    • Authority
    • Benami Transactions (Prohibition)
    • client
    • Constitution of India
    • Finance Act 1994
    • formalities to be completed
    • GST
    • Happiness
    • HOW TO
    • Income Tax
    • Indian Evidence Act 1872
    • Job Application
    • MCA
    • Office system
    • Papers required for filing
    • Principal of mutuality
    • rajasthan public trust
    • Smile
    • Subsidy
    • work report

Monthly Archive: March 2020

B.P.Mundra > 2020 > March

Calcutta High Court on 4th march, 2020 publication date 24th March, 2020 held that since the provisional Attachment u/s 83 of GST Act is ‎reprehensible and absolutely contrary to law the respondent authorities are directed ‎to pay costs of Rs. 5 lakhs to each of the three petitioners. ‎

 233 total views

 233 total views Calcutta High Court  held that since the provisional Attachment u/s 83 of GST Act is reprehensible and absolutely contrary to law the respondent authorities are directed to pay costs of  Rs. 5 lakhs to each of the three…
Read more

‎83, Article 19(1)

March 25, 2020

#Penny_Stock ITAT CHENNAI on Mar 4, 2020 hold that the A O shall require the assessee; to establish who, with whom, how and in what circumstances the impugned transactions were carried out etc., to prove that the impugned transactions are actual, genuine etc. The assessee shall comply with the A.O’s requirements as per law. The Assessing Officer shall also bring on record the role of the assessee in promoting the company and relationship of the assessee with other promoters, role of the assessee in inflating the price of shares, etc. as had been held by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Shri Aravind Nandial Khatri Vs. I.T.O referred to supra.

 262 total views

 262 total views #Penny_Stock ITAT CHENNAI on Mar 4, 2020 hold that the A O shall require the assessee; to establish who, with whom, how and in what circumstances the impugned transactions were carried out etc., to prove that the impugned…
Read more

10(38), AY 2015-16, CHENNAI ITAT

March 24, 2020

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA on Mar 19, 2020 held that Section 143(1-A) can only be invoked when the revenue discharged the burden of proving that the assessee has attempted to evade tax which may be discharged by the Revenue by establishing facts and circumstances from which a reasonable inference can be drawn that the assessee has, in fact, attempted to evade tax lawfully payable by it. Hence the Ld. AO cannot mechanically apply the provisions of Section 143(1-A) after issuing intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

 243 total views

 243 total views SUPREME COURT OF INDIA on Mar 19, 2020 held that Section 143(1-A) can only be invoked when the revenue discharged the burden of proving that the assessee has attempted to evade tax which may be discharged by the…
Read more

143(1-A), 143(1), 143(1)(a), Supreme Court

March 24, 2020

ITAT INDORE held on Mar 19, 2020 fee u/s 234E cannot be levied in the statement processed u/s 200A up to 31.05.2015.

 260 total views

 260 total views ITAT INDORE held on Mar 19, 2020 fee u/s 234E cannot be levied in the statement processed u/s 200A up to 31.05.2015.   M/S.OSWAL COMPUTERS & AMP CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. AND ORS. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) AND…
Read more

234E, AY 2013-14, Indore Tribunal

March 24, 2020

ITAT DELHI held on Mar 19, 2020 that the notice issued by the AO would be bad in law if it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings had been initiated under i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. M/S GIRI BUILDWELL PVT LTD. vs. ITO

 248 total views

 248 total views ITAT DELHI held on Mar 19, 2020 that the notice issued by the AO would be bad in law if it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings had been initiated under i.e. whether…
Read more

271(1)(c), 271(1)(c), AY 2009-10, Delhi, Delhi Tribunal, In Favour of Assessee, ITAT, Penalty, penalty 271(1)(c), penalty proceeding/s 271(1)(c) pending

March 24, 2020

ITAT LUCKNOW ने Mar 19, 2020 को फेसला दिया कि रेवेन्यू रिकॉर्ड में दर्ज खेती की जमीन पर लगाए चावल प्लांट सहित बेचने पर केवल प्लांट और प्लांट के लिए ली गई जमीन पर केपिटल गेन टैक्स लगेगा बाकी खेती की जमीन अगर खेती की जमीन धारा 2(14) में आती है तो कोई टैक्स नहीं लगेगा।

 381 total views

 381 total views रेवेन्यू रिकॉर्ड में दर्ज खेती की जमीन पर लगाए चावल प्लांट सहित बेचने पर केवल प्लांट और प्लांट के लिए ली गई जमीन पर केपिटल गेन टैक्स लगेगा बाकी खेती की जमीन अगर खेती की जमीन धारा 2(14)…
Read more

2(14), AY 2011-12, LUCKNOW ITAT

March 24, 2020

BOMBAY HIGH COURT on 14 February, 2020 hold that when an order has been passed without considering the reply and on the ground that no reply is filed, the impugned order will have to be set aside and the proceedings will have to be restored to the stage of show cause notice.

 223 total views

 223 total views BOMBAY HIGH COURT on 14 February, 2020 hold that when an order has been passed without considering the reply and on the ground that no reply is filed, the impugned order will have to be set aside and…
Read more

Bobmay High Court, GST

March 23, 2020

ITAT – Bangalore on 13 December, 2019 held that Penny Stock-When proved that share transactions are tailor made then the submission that transactions are through recognised stock exchange, through banking channels or not allowed cross examination are not acceptable. The claim is required to be proven to be illegitimate by providing all relevant documents to establish sound financial of alledged companies and that fluctuation in price was market driven and to establish genuineness of sale and purchase of alledged scripts

 249 total views

 249 total views ITAT – Bangalore on 13 December, 2019 held that Penny Stock-When proved that share transactions are tailor made then the submission that transactions are through recognised stock exchange, through banking channels or not allowed cross examination are not…
Read more

Bangalore Tribunal, Penny stock

March 20, 2020

ITAT Mumbai on 16th March 2020 held that In case of bogus bill found where actual purchases were made by cash, method of peak credit as adopted by AO would not be a suitable method rather an adhoc estimated addition would meet cause of justice

 271 total views

 271 total views MANUBHAI GEMS PRIVATE LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ITAT BOMBAY BENCH ‘E’ AMARJIT SINGH, JM & MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM. ITA No. 7301/Mum/2019 Mar 16, 2020 Section 69C, 143(1) AY  2010-11 Decision in favour of: Assessee Cases…
Read more

143(1), 69C, AY 2010-11, In Favour of Assessee, ITAT Mumbai

March 18, 2020

ITAT Mumbai on 16th March 2020 held that to make addition in Section 69C it is postulated that source of expenditure incurred not found satisfactory by Ld. AO. When purchases were reversed by the assessee in subsequent years and the transactions of purchases as well as sales were stated to be mere paper entries. The such stock purchased was reflected in closing stock. Thus it is circular transactions and are mere paper entries and no addition can be made u/s 69C.

 268 total views

 268 total views MANUBHAI GEMS PRIVATE LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ITAT BOMBAY BENCH ‘E’ AMARJIT SINGH, JM & MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM. ITA No. 7301/Mum/2019 Mar 16, 2020 Section 69C, 143(1) AY  2010-11 Decision in favour of: Assessee Cases…
Read more

143(1), 69C, AY 2010-11, ITAT Mumbai

March 18, 2020

Post navigation

1 2 3 Next →

Categories

  • 1860 (1)
  • 1956 (1)
  • 1973 (1)
  • 2002 (1)
  • 2013 (1)
  • Articles (77)
  • Authority (1)
  • Benami Transactions (Prohibition) (1)
  • client (59)
  • Code of Criminal Procedure (0)
  • Companies Act (2)
  • Constitution of India (2)
  • Cr.P.C. (2)
  • Due dates (1)
  • Finance Act 1994 (0)
  • formalities to be completed (6)
  • GST (59)
  • Happiness (4)
  • HOW TO (47)
  • HUF Property (1)
  • Income Tax (294)
  • Indian Evidence Act 1872 (1)
  • Indian Penal Code (1)
  • invalid notice (1)
  • Job Application (0)
  • MCA (3)
  • Notice 148 (0)
  • Office system (9)
  • Papers required for filing (6)
  • PMLA Act (1)
  • Prevention of Money Laundering Act (1)
  • Principal of mutuality (1)
  • rajasthan public trust (2)
  • Smile (7)
  • Subsidy (5)
  • work report (2)
  • Archives

    • February 2023
    • January 2023
    • December 2022
    • October 2022
    • September 2022
    • August 2022
    • July 2022
    • June 2022
    • May 2022
    • April 2022
    • March 2022
    • February 2022
    • January 2022
    • December 2021
    • November 2021
    • September 2021
    • August 2021
    • July 2021
    • June 2021
    • May 2021
    • April 2021
    • March 2021
    • February 2021
    • January 2021
    • December 2020
    • November 2020
    • October 2020
    • September 2020
    • August 2020
    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • December 2019
    • November 2019

    Recent Posts

    • कंपनीज की ऑडिट करने वाले कृपया ध्यान दें, अगर ऑडिट रिपोर्ट में इन्वेस्टमेंट के बारे में प्रॉपर्ली डिस्क्लोज नहीं किया तो सीए को पेनल्टी लगेगी इसी प्रकार कोई भी डिस्क्लोजर बाकी रह गया तो पेनल्टी लगेगी-Penalty u/s Section 450 or Failure to disclose properly in an audit report details of current investment by virtue of section 143 of the Companies Act, 2013
    • Consequences if one fails to furnish three consecutive returns of GST and the department cancels the registration?
    • Consequence when there is a delay of only 41 minutes in delivering the consignment and the Adjudicating Authority passed the order of creating Demand of Tax and Penalty of Rs.19,52,542/-
    • Mere pendency of that investigation would not sustain a Provisional Attachment Order(POA) based on allegations which do not form part of those proceedings. Delhi High Court passed the order on 24.01.2023. Kindly click the link to get full order.
    • Q: Whether outstanding demand from a company can be recovered u/s 179 from the director of the company without pointing out that non-recovery was on account of gross negligent, misfeasance or breach of duty on part of the Director in relation to the affairs of the company? The answer was given by The Hon’ble High Court Of Gujarat on dated 16.12.2022