In this case, the facts are that the original assessment in this case was completed u/s. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 wherein, apart from others, disallowance on account of payment of interest of Rs. 10832532/- was made. Being aggrieved by the order of..
Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return declaring income of Rs.7,08,754/-filed on 04.03.2009 by the assessee, after being processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as the Act), was selected for scrutiny w..
From the observation we can find the following fact, it is very clear that assessee has not obtained any benefit of enduring nature. The royalty is payable on the basis of volume of sales year to year. In the event of termination of agreement has to ..
facts: The appellant’s case is that since the orders under challenge in these appeals are final orders of the Tribunal, an appeal against the same lies to this Court as a matter of right, no matter the right to file such an appeal under Section 30 ..
The tax effect in this case is found to be less than Rs.3 lac, the limit prescribed under Instruction No. 3/2011 dated 09.02.2011 and when Ld.CIT(DR) was apprised of this fact, she could not controvert the same and she was also unable to show that th..
The brief facts of the case are that assessee has filed its return of income on 30.3.2003 declaring an income of Rs.43,400. This return was processed under sec. 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 25.5.2003 at the returned income. According to the ..
Despite sending notice of hearing sufficiently in advance, assessee did not appear nor any application for adjournment has been received at the time of hearing of the appeal, in spite of the fact that earlier also on several dates the hearing was adj..
The brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual. He has filed his return of income on 18.12.2006 declaring an income of Rs.155,27,356. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice under section 143(2) of t..
Briefly stated the facts of the case for the A.Y. 1998-99 are that the assessee bank filed its return claiming depreciation of `25,70,03,293. The Assessing Officer observed that there was substantial variation between the amount of depreciation as pe..
However, at the time of hearing no one was present on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application received. Appeal was passed over in the first round. Even in the second round also the position remained the same. The record shows that the ..
The tribunal in the impugned order has examined the factual matrix relating to acquisition/purchase of the equity shares mentioned at serial nos.1 to 3 and the investment in mutual funds. It has reached a categorical and a firm conclusion that the bo..
Vide lease-deed dated April 24, 1996, Ex.D-1, respondent took on lease from the appellant 4450 sq.ft. area on the fourth floor of a building popularly called „Herald House‟ at Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg and for which the monthly rental agreed was Rs.125..
The appellant was employed, since the year 1992, as a Steno-typist in the Session Division, Gurgaon, Haryana. He in the academic year 1992- 93 joined the LL.B Degree Course as a regular student of D.S. College, Aligarh, Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Universi..
The facts which revealed from the records are as under. The assessee company is engaged in the business of providing business process management, transitioning services, BPO services to its clients. The assessee is carrying out the said activity from..
Facts: On receipt of a complaint, the civil supply department of the State Government initiated an inquiry against the said concern, relating to the processing of paddy for and on behalf of the Food Corporation of India.- The respondent filed yet ..
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.78,84,241/- being the excess amount of unexpired service contracts holding that since the service contract is spread over 2 accounting ..
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction uls.801B(10) of Rs. 1,90,03,948!- by placing reliance upon various decisions ignoring the facts that the le..
Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that on the basis of information received from the office of Addl.DIT (Investigation), Ghaziabad that the assessee deposited cash in his bank account No.785 in Punjab National Bank, BB Nagar, Ghaziabad duri..
Facts: The appellant joined the Indian Customs and Central Excise Service. - The appellant demitted his office as Member (Technical) of CEGAT - As he was a law graduate, he was enrolled as an advocate with the Bar Council of India - The CEGAT was r..
At the time of hearing, it was pointed out that the amount mentioned in the grounds is not correct and the correct amount is Rs. 25,70,208/- instead of Rs. 72,96,230/-. The ld DR has accepted this factual mistake in the ground. Accordingly, we proce..
Member Strength 9,48,817 and growing..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
