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 jobs
  • Apply for job
  • Click Here
  • Viability Research

Latest Posts

Economic Package on 13.5.2020 by Finance Minister Nirmala ‎Sitharaman

 13 total views

 13 total views Economic Package on 13.5.2020 by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman   3 lakh crore Collateral-free Automatic Loan, Rs 20,000 crore loan for stressed MSMEs, Rs 50,000 crore ‘fund of funds’ to get listed on markets for MSMEs, definition of MSMEs altered Global…
Read more

Articles, Economic packages

May 13, 2020

Section 54 BANGALORE ITAT Decision on 8.5.2020: The deduction u/s 54 of the Act ‎should not be denied merely because the name of assessee’s husband is mentioned in the ‎purchase document, when the entire purchase consideration has flown from the assessee. ‎Smt. Subbalakshmi Kurada Vs ACIT AY 2016-17‎

 15 total views

 15 total views Conclusion Section 54 BANGALORE ITAT Decision on 8.5.2020: The deduction u/s 54 of the Act should not be denied merely because the name of assessee’s husband is mentioned in the purchase document, when the entire purchase consideration has…
Read more

54, 54F, AY 2016-17, Bangalore Tribunal, In Favour of Assessee

May 13, 2020

Section 69A, 69B, 148, 254 CHANDULAL AMRUTLAL SHAH (HUF) & ORS. vs. ITO ‎May 4, 2020 ITAT SURAT AY 2000-01 & 2004-05. Supreme Court in the case of MCorp ‎Global (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 309 ITR 434 (SC) held that It is well-settled that the Tribunal ‎is not authorized to take back the benefit granted to the assessee by the Assessing Officer. It ‎has no power to enhance the assessment. In view of the statutory provisions. AO cannot ‎enhanced the income originally assessed under section 143 (3) in set-aside proceeding in ‎consequence of direction of the tribunal.‎

 21 total views

 21 total views Section 69A, 69B, 148, 254 CHANDULAL AMRUTLAL SHAH (HUF) & ORS. vs. ITO May 4, 2020 ITAT SURAT           AY 2000-01 & 2004-05. Supreme Court in the case of MCorp Global (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 309 ITR 434…
Read more

148, 254, 69A-Unexplained money, 69B, AY 2000-01, AY 2004-05, In favour of Assessee (Partly), ITAT Surat

May 12, 2020

Section 147, 148 ANAND DEVELOPERS vs. ACIT HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY GOA ‎BENCH ‎1 Feb, 2020 Notice u/s 147 and order u/s 148 is quashed and set aside when ‎a notice seeking to reopen assessment is beyond normal period of 4 years, in a case where ‎the assessment has been made under Section 143(3) and the revenue failed to establish ‎the precondition even prima facie that there was failure on the part of the assessee to ‎disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment for that assessment ‎year.‎

 18 total views

 18 total views Conclusion Section 147, 148 ANAND DEVELOPERS vs. ACIT HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY GOA BENCH   1 Feb, 2020 Notice u/s 147 and order u/s 148 is quashed and set aside when a notice seeking to reopen assessment is beyond…
Read more

147, 148, HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY GOA BENCH, In Favour of Assessee

May 12, 2020

Section 68- AY 2011-12- ITAT SURAT- May 4, 2020‎ When the assessee furnishes names and addresses of the alleged creditors and the GIR ‎Numbers, the burden shifts to the Department to establish the revenue’s case and in ‎order to sustain the addition the revenue has to pursue the enquiry and to establish the ‎lack of creditworthiness and mere non-compliance of summons issued by the Assessing ‎Officer under section 131 by the alleged creditors will not be sufficient to draw an ‎adverse inference against the assessee.‎ DCIT vs. KEJRIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.‎

 16 total views

 16 total views Section 68- AY 2011-12- ITAT SURAT- May 4, 2020 When the assessee furnishes names and addresses of the alleged creditors and the GIR Numbers, the burden shifts to the Department to establish the revenue’s case and in order…
Read more

68, AY 2011-12, In Favour of Assessee, ITAT Surat

May 11, 2020

Section 32, 37, 36(1)(iii), 37(1), 131, 133A, 56, 147‎ AY 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15‎ After going through the various terms of the deed if it is loan/finance arrangement ‎between the parties then the assessee is entitled only to claim interest as expenditure u/s ‎‎36 (1) (iii) and depreciation and is not entitled to claim the principal component of ‎alleged lease rent paid as ‘revenue expenditure’ u/s 37(1). FASTWAY TRANSMISSION ‎‎(P) LTD. vs. ACIT ITAT CHANDIGARH May 6, 2020‎

 20 total views

 20 total views Section 32, 37, 36(1)(iii), 37(1), 131, 133A, 56, 147 AY 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15  WHEN LOAN / FINANCE ARRANGEMENT IN THE GUISE OF A LEASE AGREEMENT The moot question is that whether the assessee is the owner of the…
Read more

131(1), 133A, 147, 32, 36(1)(iii), 37, 37(1), 56, AY 2012-13, AY 2013-14, AY 2014-15, Chandigarh ITAT, In favour of Revenue

May 10, 2020

The AO is not hand writing expert to distinguish the signature of the karigar as appearing in ‎the salary register and this cannot be solitary ground to reject the books of accounts. No GP ‎addition is sustained when no defects have been pointed out by the AO in the the relevant ‎records produced by the assessee in form of export bills, purchased bills and cash books etc. ‎along with books of accounts and also submit the reason of fall in GP.‎

 12 total views

 12 total views The AO is not hand writing expert to distinguish the signature of the karigar as appearing in the salary register and this cannot be solitary ground to reject the books of accounts. No GP addition is sustained when…
Read more

145(3), 250(6), 43(5), 45(3), In Favour of Assessee, In favour of Assessee (Partly), ITAT Surat

May 10, 2020

Section 148-ITAT, PUNE BENCH-11 September, 2019 held that Reassessment—Validity—only on the basis of the some reasons to believe about the escapement of income. Existence of reasons for escapement of income are sine qua non to embark upon the assessment or reassessment under section 147 of the Act. Kailash Kanhaiyalal Gidwani v. ACIT. AY 2009-10

 54 total views

 54 total views Section 148-ITAT, PUNE BENCH-11 September, 2019 held that Reassessment—Validity—only on the basis of the some reasons to believe about the escapement of income. Existence of reasons for escapement of income are sine qua non to embark upon the…
Read more

143(1), 143(1)(a), 143(2), 143(3), 147, 148, AY 2009-10, In Favour of Assessee, Pune Tribunal

May 10, 2020

Gujarat High Court on 11 February, 2020 held that if Employees contribution to ‎PF account as well as ESI contribution deposited timely as per section 36(1)(va) ‎then only the deduction is allowable. Kindly note that law as propounded by case ‎laws is different in different States. Kindly further note that this is relating to ‎Employee contribution not employer contribution. PCIT vs M/S Suzlon Energy ‎Ltd.‎

 14 total views

 14 total views   Two different judgements are   If deposited timely as per section 36(1)(va) then only the deduction is allowable. Even a delay of 1 day in depositing it may cause the entire amount in default to be disallowed…
Read more

2(24)(x), 36(1)(va), 43B, AY 2012-13, Gujrat High Court, In Favour of Assessee

May 9, 2020

Employees contribution to PF / ESI contribution-Deposited ‎timely as per section 36(1)(va) or upto due date of filing ITR u/s 139(1)-Law as propounded by case laws is different in different States.

 16 total views

 16 total views Law as propounded by case laws is different in different States regarding Employees contribution to PF account as well as ESI contribution-Deposited timely as per section 36(1)(va) or upto due date of filing ITR u/s 139(1).   Kindly…
Read more

2(24)(x), 36(1)(va), 43B, Articles

May 9, 2020

Post navigation

← Previous 1 2 3 4 5 … 37 Next →

Categories

  • Articles (41)
  • Authority (1)
  • Benami Transactions (Prohibition) (1)
  • client (53)
  • Constitution of India (1)
  • Finance Act 1994 (0)
  • formalities to be completed (1)
  • GST (56)
  • Income Tax (199)
  • Indian Evidence Act 1872 (1)
  • Job Application (0)
  • MCA (2)
  • Office system (5)
  • Papers required for filing (6)
  • Principal of mutuality (1)
  • rajasthan public trust (2)
  • Smile (6)
  • Subsidy (5)
  • work report (2)

    • Archives

    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • December 2019
    • November 2019

    Recent Posts

    • Section 54F, 139(4) ITAT, Jaipur on 6th march, 2020 Respectfully following the judgement of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shankar Lal Saini [2018] 89 taxmann.com 235(Raj) held that even amount deposited in Capital Gain Account Scheme before filing of return u/s 139(4) shall also be allowed for deduction as per provisions of sub- section 4 of section 54F of the Act. Smt. Renu Jain, New Delhi vs Ito. AY 2011-12
    • Rule 3A r.w.s sub-clause (b) of clause (ii) of the proviso to sub-clause (vi) of clause (2) of section 17 How to get a hospital approved so that tax exemptions can be obtained by employee for medical costs incurred by employer in the prescribed treatment.
    • Friends this case is belonging to Section 132, 143(1), 153A(1) and 153C. ITAT DELHI on Jun 30, 2020 on the issue of determining the six assessment years prior to the date of search. Facts in brief are that the document of the assessee was found during search operation on dated 9.10.2014 at the premises of Shri Mulchand Malu and Shri Vikas Malu and therefore the assessee was the “other person” to be assessed u/s 153C. Further there was undisputed facts that the documents etc., were handed-over to the A.O. of the assessee was in the month of September, 2016. It was held that therefore the six assessment years prior to the date of search in the case of the assessee is A.Ys. 2011-2012 to 2016-2017. Therefore, there is no jurisdiction with the A.O. to pass assessment order for the assessment year 2009-10 and the same was held to be without jurisdiction, void abinitio and was quashed. ACIT vs. KUBER PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AY 2009-2010. In favour of the assessee
    • Section 144 r.w. Section 145(3): ITAT JAIPUR on Jun 19, 2020 held that Even if the books f ‎accounts rejected by invoking provisions of Section 145(3) due doubt on genuineness of the ‎purchases, the A.O. is bound to frame the assessment on best assessment as per provisions of ‎Section 144 r.w. Section 145(3). Therefore, after rejection of books of account, the A.O. is ‎required to estimate the income of the assessee on some reasonable and proper basis. Once the ‎past year results have attained finality and not in dispute, the same can form the basis for ‎estimating the GP rate for the current year. KEDIA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. & ANR. vs. ‎ACIT. AY 2009-10, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Decision in favour of Assessee
    • Section 127, 132(4) HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY on Jul 15, 2019 held that when the ‎assessment of an Assessee is being transferred from one Commissionerate to another, the ‎requirement of hearing and following the principle of natural justice is inbuilt in the ‎statutory provisions contained in Section 127 of the Act. Therefore the giving of notice to ‎the assessee containing the reasons and the statements or even the gist of the statements ‎to the extent relevant for the proposed action is a basic postulate. The views of the ‎noticee are to be considered by the authority before taking any decision to confirm or ‎drop the notice. A show cause notice to be effective must be adequate so as to enable a ‎party to effectively object/respond to the same. The authority concerned is obliged to ‎consider the objections, if any, and thereafter, reach a finding one way or the other. The ‎impugned order is quashed. NARESH MANAKCHAND JAIN vs PCIT. IN favour of the ‎assessee.‎