Income Tax Judgements

From the observation we can find the following fact.. The assessee is engaged in the business of jobbing / arbitrage activities. He undertakes business of share trading on his own account. He filed his return of income on 27th July 2006, declaring

At the very outset, Ld. DR submitted that with respect to all the three additions of Rs.4,37,45,772/-, 5,64,000/- and Rs.5,39,585/- on account of purchases, excess remuneration and commission paid respectively, the assessee did not file necessary con

We find that appeal in this case was filed on 4.2.2011 i.e. before the aforesaid instruction dated 9.2.2011. However, tax effect is below even ``2 lacs, stipulated in CBDT instruct ion no. 5 of 2008 dated 15.5.2008. Moreover, a co-ordinate Bench vide

We have heard the ld AR of the assessee as well as the ld DR and considered the relevant material on record. The Assessing Officer has disallowed a sum of Rs.1,61,390/- u/s 14A by applying Rule 8D of I T Rules. The CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowa

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in directing to allow interest under section 244A on the amount of self assessment tax ignoring the Circular No.769 and 790 issued by the CBDT The facts which are

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition in this Court alleging that the respondent custom authority is delaying the release of the said consignment by taking the plea that the goods imported were old and used and therefore, they are “Elect

The brief facts necessitating the disposal of the present petition are that a complaint was received by the Regional Director, Northern Region, Noida regarding irregularity/ illegality in the affairs of the Petitioner Company. The complaint was forwa

I have carefully examined the submissions.The refund claim in question comprises three distinct elements. The claim of Rs.2,81,558/- is in respect of remoulded chocolates. There is no disputed of the fact that this item has been held to be non-excisa

Whether in the facts & circumstances of the case Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has erred in law and facts of the case in annulling the re-assessment proceedings merely on the ground of service of notice ignoring the provisions of section 2

The tribunal in the impugned order has not referred to the factual matrix or given any finding either affirming or contrary to the finding recorded by the Assessing Officer/CIT (Appeals). The tribunal referred to the decision of the Jaipur Bench in t