Upon hearing the parties to the case the Court affirmed the view of the HC and held that, a complete exclusion of general public will amount to violation of Article 25 therefore the temple authorities may be permitted to exclude general public only i
The Supreme Court set aside the order of the High Court which was passed in favour of the Respondents and upheld the decision of the trial court. It was held that the current facts and circumstances raised grave concern over the genuineness over the
In this order the ITAT has discussed and decided that performance bonus cannot be treated as salary for the purpose of calculation of exemption of HRA under section 10(13A);
The Hon’ble CESTAT, Mumbai held that reimbursement of the cost of obtaining and employing resources/certain expenses incurred by the Appellant on the behalf of the Group Companies cannot be regarded as consideration flowing to the Appellant towards t
The Hon’ble AAR, after detailed discussion, held that: The phrase 'grant of license to use the system on a non-exclusive basis' is used for the reason that the proprietary/intellectual property used in the system is utilized by the Applicant in othe
The Hon’ble High Court of Patna held as under: The ‘Governmental authority’ as defined in the Notification dated January 30, 2014, means an authority or a board or any other body set up by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature;
Section 234E of the Income Tax Act,1961 is intravires the Constitution of India. The said Section 234E does not violate any provision of the Constitution of India. Delay in furnishing TDS Returns/Statements increases the work burden of the Department
The assessee is a trustee in three different trusts. CIT(A) held that the trusts were not valid trusts since they did not come into existence in accordance with Section 6 of Indian Trusts Act” and its income should be taxed in hands of all the truste
The bench comprising of Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan and Justice A.K. Sikri dismissed the discharge plea of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalitha and her associate S. Sasikalaa and ordered a trial against them for not filing income tax returns for
In brief the facts are that in this case return of income was filed by the assessee declaring a loss of Rs. 19,906/-. The assessment was completed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) of the I.T.Act at an income of Rs. 12,42,412/- by making following disallowance
