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: April 2020

B.P.Mundra > 2020 > April

Supreme court on 24th April, 2020 held that clause (f) in Section 43B of the 1961 Act is ‎constitutionally valid and therefore any sum payable by the assessee as an employer in lieu of ‎any leave at the credit of his employee is allowable only on actual payment. Division Bench ‎of High Court at Calcutta order is reversed.‎

 223 total views

 223 total views     “…..the insertion of clause (f) has not extinguished the autonomy of the assessee to follow the mercantile system. It merely defers the benefit of deduction to be availed by the assessee for the purpose of computing…
Read more

43B, 43B(f), In favour of Revenue, Supreme Court

April 28, 2020

ITAT DELHI on Mar 19, 2020 cancelled the penalty levied as the notice issued by the AO was held as bad in law as 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. ADMAN ADVERTISING vs ACIT

 159 total views

 159 total views ITAT DELHI on Mar 19, 2020 cancelled the penalty levied as the notice issued by the AO was held as bad in law as it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings had been…
Read more

271(1)(c), AY 2010-11, Delhi, Delhi Tribunal, In Favour of Assessee, Penalty, penalty 271(1)(c)

April 28, 2020

During lock down period- the AO has acted with undue haste in passing the orders under Section 201(1)(1A) of the Act.- The writ was allowed for quashing the order passed under Section 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961- the demand notice. Immediately after the lockdown is withdrawn by the Government, a period of two weeks reckoned therefrom is granted to the petitioner to reply to the Notices to the show cause issued by the respondent.

 251 total views

 251 total views During lock down period- the AO has acted with undue haste in passing the orders  under Section 201(1)(1A) of the Act.- The writ was allowed for quashing the order passed under Section 201 of the Income Tax Act,…
Read more

201(1)(1A), AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, Delhi, Delhi High Court, Demand, In Favour of Assessee

April 28, 2020

आयकर छापे व सर्वे-कैसे बचे या पड़ जाए तो कैसे सामना करें

 479 total views

 479 total views आयकर छापे व सर्वे- Please click the link to see the video ‎1.‎ आयकर छापे व सर्वे का मुख्य उद्देश्य आयकर की चोरी को पकड़ना या ‎चोरी को रोकना है ‎ a.‎ आयकर का छापा पड़ने का मुख्य…
Read more

Articles

April 26, 2020

ITAT- Amritsar on 18 February, 2020-hold that In the light of ratio laid down by the Hon`ble ‎Supreme Court citation 418 ITR 662 (S.C.) it is the duty of the assessee to keep upto date the ‎address in data base of the IT Department by submitting timely prescribed application.‎

 191 total views

 191 total views ITAT- Amritsar on 18 February, 2020-hold that In the light of ratio laid down by the Hon`ble Supreme Court citation 418 ITR 662 (S.C.) it is the duty of the assessee to keep upto date the address in…
Read more

143(2), 147, 148, 282, 49A, AY 2009-10, ITAT Amritsar ‎

April 25, 2020

Supreme Court on 24.4.2020 held that no addition u/s 68 can be allowed when the CIT ‎Appeal deleted the penalty on the same credit entry on the ground that the assessee establish ‎the credentials. High Court also held that when the books of accounts rejected for GP ‎addition purpose, but then, if those books of accounts did disclose certain other assets, ‎which are wrongly shown to be liabilities, and for acquisition of which the assessee did ‎not show the source, it cannot be said that the Assessing Officer was not entitled to use ‎the books of accounts for this purpose.‎ Basir Ahmed Sisodiya Vs. ITO

 224 total views

 224 total views SC-Section 68-271(1)(c)-GP Rate-addition   Supreme Court on 24.4.2020 held that no addition u/s 68 can be allowed when the CIT Appeal deleted the penalty on the same credit entry on the ground that the assessee establish the credentials….
Read more

144, 145(3), 271(1)(c), 44AB, 68, AY 1998-99, penalty 271(1)(c), Supreme Court, unexplained cash credit

April 25, 2020

ITAT Delhi on 31st jan; 2019 held that CIT(A) could not enhance income of assessee on ‎altogether ‘new Source’.‎ before submitting your written submission kindly read carefully the notes and read case laws mentioned.

 224 total views

 224 total views ITAT Delhi on 31st jan; 2019 held that CIT(A) could not enhance income of assessee on altogether ‘new Source’. HARI MOHAN SHARMA & ANR. vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH ‘E’…
Read more

147, 148, 151, 151(1)(a), 263-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue, 54F, AY 2014-15, In Favour of Assessee, Matter remanded

April 22, 2020

ITAT KOLKATA on Mar 13, 2020 quashed the reopening of assessment and allow this appeal of the assessee on the ground that the re-opening is bad in law as the Assessing Officer has not independently applied his mind to the material and recorded reasons which are vague and merely based on borrowed satisfaction.

 170 total views

 170 total views ITAT KOLKATA on Mar 13, 2020 quashed the reopening of assessment and allow this appeal of the assessee on the ground that the re-opening is bad in law as the Assessing Officer has not independently applied his mind…
Read more

147, AY 2011-12, bogus, borrowed satisfaction, In Favour of Assessee, Kolkata tribunal, Reason recorded, Satisfaction

April 20, 2020

What are the consequences when the notice u/s 143(2) served without examining the return filed in compliance of notice.? The answer is given by ITAT DELHI on 20 February, 2020 in the case of ‎Ananya Portfolio (P) Ltd. v. ITO- IT-CASES-203-2020. Assessment quashed.

 230 total views

 230 total views ITAT DELHI on 20 February, 2020 held that the provisions of s. 143(2) make it clear that the notice can only be served after the assessing officer has examined the return filed by the assessee. Whereas it is…
Read more

143(2), 143(3), 148, Authority, AY 2009-10, AY 2010-11, Delhi, Delhi Tribunal, H.S. SIDHU, In Favour of Assessee, J.M.‎

April 18, 2020

Section 147, 132 Gujarat High Court on 25 February, 2020 held that when Search and seizure of incriminating ‎material is at third party and have not in the name of or in hand writings or signature of the ‎assessee, also no such transaction is with third party then in the absence of any other ‎independent material to corroborate the statement of third party no addition can be made.‎ it-cases-205-2020

 216 total views

 216 total views Gujarat High Court on 25 February, 2020 held that when Search and seizure of incriminating material is at third party and have not in the name of or in hand writings or signature of the assessee, also no…
Read more

132, 143(3), 147, 68, AY 2006-07, Gujrat High Court, In Favour of Assessee, incriminating material

April 18, 2020

Post navigation

1 2 3 Next →

Categories

  • Articles (72)
  • Authority (1)
  • Benami Transactions (Prohibition) (1)
  • client (58)
  • Constitution of India (2)
  • Due dates (1)
  • Finance Act 1994 (0)
  • formalities to be completed (6)
  • GST (58)
  • Happiness (4)
  • HOW TO (47)
  • HUF Property (1)
  • Income Tax (278)
  • Indian Evidence Act 1872 (1)
  • invalid notice (1)
  • Job Application (0)
  • MCA (3)
  • Notice 148 (0)
  • Office system (9)
  • Papers required for filing (6)
  • Principal of mutuality (1)
  • rajasthan public trust (2)
  • Smile (7)
  • Subsidy (5)
  • work report (2)
  • Archives

    • 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

    • ITAT DELHI “SMC” BENCH Pronouncement the order on 27.5.2022 in the case of Bharat Bhushan Jain Vs. ITO.
    • हाई कोर्ट ऑफ मद्रास ने 2 अगस्त 2017 को फैसला देते हुए कहा कि अगर कोई एग्रीकल्चर लैंड धारा 2(1A) के अनुसार एग्रीकल्चर लैंड है यदि आयकर दाता ने उसकी एजुकेशन इनकम नहीं बताई है लेकिन उसपर खेती के प्रूफ मौजूद है तो उस पर आयकर नहीं लगेगा कारण की धारा 2(14) में कैपिटल एसेट में एग्रीकल्चर लैंड नहीं आती
    • Question: Is assessee deemed in default when not filed stay application but filed the evidence of appeal filed and in this circumstances can recovery action as per sections 222, 223 of the Income Tax Act be initiated by the Tax Recovery Officer?
    • Q Can credit of TDS be denied on the ground that income corresponding to the TDS claim made by the assessee is not offered in the in the corresponding year rather offered to tax in earlier years? IN THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH in the case of KEMA India (P) Ltd. v. ITO ITA No. 1616/DEL/2020 on dated 31 March, 2022 Answer: The assessee is entitled to get its credit by way of refund, in spite of not offering any income for tax, arising from profit and loss account, in present assessment year.
    • Question: Consequences of Penalty-Concealment-Non-striking off of the irrelevant part while issuing notice u/s 271(1)(c). ITAT – Delhi in the case of Malook Nagar, New Delhi vs Acit Central Circle-15, New Delhi on 13 May, 2022