Judgements by Taxguy

Surcharge on block assessment cases whether retrospective from 01.06.2002 or not - matter refered to larger bench in SC.

While circulars and instructions issued by the Board are binding on the authorities under the respective statutes, but when the Supreme Court or the High Court declares the law on the question arising for consideration, it would not be appropriate fo

(i) S. 94(7) was inserted prospectively w.e.f. 1.4.2002 to disallow dividend stripping losses. If the argument of the Revenue that even transactions prior to s. 94(7) can be disallowed is accepted, it will render s. 94(7) redundant and also lead to a

Where the Tribunal did not pass an order on the appeal despite considerable delay and instead fixed the matter repeatedly for ‘clarifications’ and thereafter closed the matter for orders on the basis of written submissions and without hearing the ass

Where the assessee entered into an agreement for transfer of its industrial undertaking under which the buyer agreed to pay it interest on the unpaid consideration w.e.f 1.3.1977 and subsequently on 30.6.1978 the parties agreed to defer the date of c

The profits of super profit companies should not be “normalized”; instead they should be excluded from the list of comparables; The proviso to section 92 C (2) provides a standard deduction of 5% to the taxpayers at their option.

There are two types of "debt". A debt payable by the assessee is different from a debt receivable by the assessee.

A statutory authority despite receipt of such a request could have kept mum. It should have taken some action. It should have responded to the prayer of the appellant. However, another principle should also be borne in mind, namely, that a statutor