Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Recent Case Laws JUN 2011

2011] 11 409 (LUCKNOW - ITAT)
IT : Where Tribunal had dismissed appeals of assessees for want of prosecution but it was apparent that assessees had engaged advocates for conducting said cases and due to strike called by members of various Tribunal bars counsels of assessees could not appear before Tribunal, such ex parte orders should be recalled

[2011] 11 411 (SAT - MUM)
SEBI : A person who is required to answer charge must know not only accusation but also testimony by which accusation is supported; he must be given a fair chance to hear evidence in support of charge and to put such relevant questions by way of cross-examination as he desires

[2011] 11 410 (MUM. - CESTAT)
ST : There is no prohibition for availment of Cenvat credit of input/input service which has been received by an assessee prior to his registration as an output service provider

[2011] 11 408 (BOM.)
CL : Official Liquidator is competent to restrict claims of secured creditors holding a certificate under section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts Act for recovery of dues up to date of winding-up order, and for payment of subsequent interest

[2011] 11 407 (SC)
IT : Employee having grievance against his employer for deduction of tax at source from salary, should approach income-tax authority and should not file a criminal complaint

[2011] 11 406 (DELHI - ITAT)
IT : Where difference in arm's length price determined by TPO in respect of international transaction and revenue actually received by assessee did not exceed safe harbour of ±5 per cent, no addition to income was called for

[2011] 11 405 (MUM. - ITAT)
IT : Adjustment on account of unutilized modvat credit under provisions of section 145A is also required to be made in opening stock

[2011] 11 404 (CHENNAI - ITAT)
IT : Where assessee had invested in shares by using borrowed funds, but had neither received any dividend from investment nor had it claimed any income as not includible in its total income, no disallowance under section 14A could be made for relevant assessment year

[2011] 11 403 (GAUHATI)
IT : Where tax liability is less than monetary limit prescribed by relevant CBDT instruction, appeal under section 260A will be incompetent


CIT, Bangalore Vs M/s Shetron Limited (Dated: November 22, 2010)

Income Tax - Sections 34A(4), 234B, 234C - Whether when rectification order u/ 154 is passed, interest is to be computed only up to the date of regular assessment. - Revenue's appeal dismissed : KARNATAKA HIGH COURT;


M/s PCBL Industrial Ltd Vs CIT, Kolkata (Dated: June 16, 2011)

Income tax – Section 73 – Whether when the principal business of the assessee is to grant loans and advances, the loss suffered by the assessee is not covered under explanation to section 73 as it is covered under the exception to the said explanation. - Assessee's appeal allowed : CALCUTTA HIGH COURT;


M/s Sami Labs Ltd Vs ACIT, Bangalore (Dated: December 30, 2010)

Income tax – Sections 10A(2), 10B, 80J, 148 – Whether, even if the assessee fails to fulfill the eligibility conditions for deduction u/s 10B in the initial years but fulfills the same for later years falling in the block of 10 years, benefits can be availed - Assessee's appeal dismissed : KARNATAKA HIGH COURT;


CIT Vs Harley Street Pharmaceuticals Ltd (Dated: May 4, 2011 )

Income Tax - Sections 50C, 69B - Whether the provisions contained in Section 50C can also be applied to cases governed u/s 69B. - Revenue's appeal dismissed : GUJARAT HIGH COURT;

2011-TIOL-375-ITAT-MUM-SB + it spl story

M/s Dalal Broacha Stock Broking Pvt Ltd Vs Addl.CIT, Mumbai (Dated: June 22, 2011)

Income tax – Sections 36(1)(ii), 37(1), 40A(2) – Whether when commission is paid to the Directors of the assessee-company who hold all the shares of the company, disallowance is warranted on the ground that the commission was paid in lieu of dividend to avoid tax on dividend - Whether section 36(1)(ii) is applicable only to employees who are not shareholders – Whether the expression "payable" used in section 36(1)(ii) means that the shareholder should have right to receive dividend and since the payment of dividend is discretionary to be decided by the management of the company and not compulsory, it cannot be said that the dividend is payable in case of the employee directors – Whether payment of bonus or commission to an employee / director will also be covered by the provisions of section 36(1)(ii) and not under section 37(1). - Assessee's appeal dismissed : MUMBAI ITAT {SPECIAL BENCH };

Sale and Purchase of agricultural land-Necessity of utilisation of proceed from sale of agricultural land in purchase of new land
For the purposes of claiming exemption under section 54B one-to-one correlation between sale proceeds of agricultural land and utilisation of such proceeds for purchase of land is not necessary.-Vide Sita Jain & Ors. v. ACIT & Anr. (2011) 39 (II) ITCL 499 (Del 'E'-Trib)


Receive free SMS of finance updates and alert at mobile Cost free
aaykarbhavan:News about the aykarbhavan
Good and Clean funny, informative motivational SMSes
Or Join it by sending SMS

go to write messge in your mobile type

"on aaykarbhavan" /
"on rajkumarsms"

and sen it to 9870807070

No comments:

Post a Comment