Del HC confirms 271(1)(c) on estimated income

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in decision dated 15.04.2014 in the case of kalindi Rail Nirman Engg Ltd. has reversed the decisions of CIT(A) as well as ITAT and has confirmed the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) by holding that said penalty can be levied even in cases where income is estimated by AO. The…

Read More

Calcutta HC holds 40(a)(ia) applies on WIP

In a recent decision dated 09.04.2014 rendered by Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. FAIRLAND DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD, the Hon’ble Court has held that “when an expenditure of a revenue nature was incurred and shown as work in progress, it could not be said that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) were…

Read More

Bombay HC quashes notice u/s 148

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has quashed the notice issued by Assessing officer u/s 148. The reasons recorded by assessing officer did not contain words that the what the assessee had failed to disclose since the re-opening was beyond 4 years. To read complete text of judgement, click here Bom HC on no mention of…

Read More

No 194H on discount to stockist-dealers – Bom HC

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the Intervet India Private Limited has ruled that provisions of Sec 194H and thereby sec 40(a)(ia) are not applicable on discounts paid to stockists and dealers as the relationship was on principal to principal basis. For complete text of judgement click here No 194H on discount to stockists-dealers-Bom HC

Read More

S. 226: AO warned of contempt action

S. 226: AO warned of contempt action for seeking to overreach ITAT’s stay order The assessee filed a stay application before the Tribunal and informed the AO about the same. Thereafter, the Tribunal heard the matter on 14.02.2014 and granted stay of the demand. Despite this, the AO attached the assessee’s bank account on 19.02.2014…

Read More

commission paid by MF broker to sub-agent, 194H not apply

The Hon’ble Allahabad HC in a decision dated 13.03.2014 has held that on reading of provision of sec 194H, the Mutual fund broker is not required to deduct TDS on payment to sub-agent as section excludes TDS on commission paid for securities. Interestingly the broker was a firm of Chartered Accountants. To read complete text…

Read More