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: July 2021

B.P.Mundra > 2021 > July

Section 147, 148, 143(3). If reopening within a period of four years of assessment u/s 143(3) then there is no bar for reopening of assessment If there is certain non-disclosure. But If reopening beyond four years for assessment already in u/s 143(3) then It must be established that the assessee has not disclosed fully and truly all material evidence with an intention to escape from the payment of tax. motive or intention on the part of the assessee for such non-disclosure is also a material ground. It is a case where the reopening beyond four years of assessment u/s 143(3) and the order of approval, which was validly granted, was produced before the Assessing Officer at the time of scrutiny and the Assessing Officer also accepted the approval order and granted exemption. Thus, the reason stated in the impugned proceedings that the assessee committed a mistake cannot be accepted. M/S.Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. … vs ACIT Madras High Court … on 16 June, 2021

 369 total views

 369 total views Madras High Court M/S.Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. … vs ACIT… on 16 June, 2021 W.P.No.43662 of 2016 Conclusion Section 147, 148, 143(3). If reopening within a period of four years of assessment u/s 143(3) then there is no…
Read more

143(3), 147, 148, AY 2009-10, madras High Court

July 26, 2021

Since books of account were not rejected, therefore, provisions of section 69B were wrongly invoked by AO. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4842 (Raj-HC) CIT v. Gaurav Kumar Sharma on dated 12 October, 2017

 276 total views

 276 total views 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4842 (Raj-HC) CIT v. Gaurav Kumar Sharma INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 Since books of account were not rejected, therefore, provisions of section 69B were wrongly invoked by AO. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4842 (Raj-HC) CIT v. Gaurav Kumar…
Read more

69B, AY 2008-09, RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

July 24, 2021

In E-Assessment order demand is raised without providing an opportunity by issue of show cause notice? Assessment void. In the case of RMSI PRIVATE LIMITED vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE HIGH COURT OF DELHI W.P.(C) 6482/2021 & CM APPL. 20366/2021 on dated Jul 14, 2021 Section 143(3), 144B(9) AY 2017-18

 448 total views

 448 total views RMSI PRIVATE LIMITED vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE HIGH COURT OF DELHI MANMOHAN & NAVIN CHAWLA, JJ. W.P.(C) 6482/2021 & CM APPL. 20366/2021 Jul 14, 2021 Section 143(3), 144B(9) AY 2017-18 Decision in favour of: Assessee In E-Assessment order…
Read more

143(3), 144B(9), 2019, Clause 5 (1) (viii), Clause 5 (x), E-Assessment Scheme

July 21, 2021

Even if the petitioner was not present before the Tribunal when the appeal was taken up for hearing, it could not have been dismissed. Dismissal of appeals by ITAT for non-persecution is wholly illegal and unjustified. Rule 24 of the 1963 Rules does not give power to the learned Tribunal to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. IN THE KERALA HIGH COURT in the case of Rabindra Kumar Mohanty v. Registrar, ITAT W.P.(C) No. 2487 of 2019 on dated 18 March, 2020. Section 254 IT Act and Rule 24 of Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963

 356 total views

 356 total views Section 254 IT Act and Rule 24 of Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 IN THE KERALA HIGH COURT C.R. DASH & S.K. PANIGRAHI, JJ. Rabindra Kumar Mohanty v. Registrar, ITAT W.P.(C) No. 2487 of 2019 18 March, 2020…
Read more

Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, Rule 24

July 20, 2021

Income Tax Slabs 2021 & Tax Rates for FY 2020-21

 311 total views

 311 total views income tax rates for FY 2021-22

Articles

July 13, 2021

Gift deed format

 174 total views

 174 total views CONFIRMATION OF GIFT I, Shri ,,., S/o.,, Aged 48 years R/o ……..r. do here by state on oath as under: – That my PAN No. is ,… That I am Prop. of ………../service at…. That Mr…………. s/o…….Aged …….
Read more

Articles, Format

July 10, 2021

Receipt of Software license amounting to Rs.86,05,13,407/- cannot be charged to tax as ‘Royalties’ under the DTAA. In the same manner, the amount will escape taxation as ‘Business profits’ under Article 7 also because of it not having any PE in India. Albeit Explanation 4 to section 9(1)(vi) is applicable to the year under consideration, but section 90(2) of Act states that where the Central Government has entered into an agreement with the Government of any country outside India under sub-section (1), then, in relation to the assessee to whom such agreement applies, the provisions of this Act shall apply to the extent they are more beneficial to that assessee. ANSYS INC. vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONL TAXATION) ITAT PUNE Jun 15, 2021 Section 9(1)(vi) and Article 12 of India-US DTAA. AY 2009-10 & 2014-15.Decision in favour of: Assessee

 233 total views

 233 total views Receipt of Software license amounting to Rs.86,05,13,407/- cannot be charged to tax as ‘Royalties’ under the DTAA. In the same manner, the amount will escape taxation as ‘Business profits’ under Article 7 also because of it not having…
Read more

9(1)(vi), Article 12 of India-US DTAA

July 2, 2021

Categories

  • 2002 (1)
  • Articles (74)
  • Authority (1)
  • Benami Transactions (Prohibition) (1)
  • client (58)
  • Constitution of India (2)
  • Cr.P.C. (1)
  • Due dates (1)
  • Finance Act 1994 (0)
  • formalities to be completed (6)
  • GST (59)
  • Happiness (4)
  • HOW TO (47)
  • HUF Property (1)
  • Income Tax (293)
  • Indian Evidence Act 1872 (1)
  • invalid notice (1)
  • Job Application (0)
  • MCA (3)
  • Notice 148 (0)
  • Office system (9)
  • Papers required for filing (6)
  • PMLA Act (1)
  • Principal of mutuality (1)
  • rajasthan public trust (2)
  • Smile (7)
  • Subsidy (5)
  • work report (2)
  • Archives

    • 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

    • 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
    • 48th GST Council recommendation. Very useful to note
    • Q: Can income tax officer order for Provisional attachment of cash, bank, any property belonging to the assessee? HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT passed the order on dated 29/11/2022.
    • Question Whether van rent received and paid by the educational institute appearing in both side of income of expenditure account will be counted for calculating turnover of the assessee to allow the benefit U/s 10(23C) of the Act. ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR passed the order on 10.8.2022 in thc case of Baba Farid Public Welfare Society vs. ITO (Exemptions), Ward, Amritsar
    • Bail can be granted in PMLA cases on the ground of serious medical condition. there is no longer rigor of said two conditions under the Original Section 45(1)(ii) of the PML Act for releasing the petitioner on bail.On filing SLP by the department, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA on dated date 20.10.2022 Imposed cost of Rs. 1 lac holding as it is unnecessary SLP. Section 45(1)(ii)