Judgements by CS Bijoy

TDS deducted but not deposited within the time limit prescribed u/s. 201 of the Act. The same was deposited on 15.02.2006. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee could not contribute anything which supports his case. But after going through the records, we

Section 41(1) of the Act, as it existed at the relevant time, was as under:- “41. Profits chargeable to tax.—(1) Where an allowance or deduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability inc

Brief facts are that the assessee is a private limited company carrying on business of dealing in shares, operation in share futures and commodity futures. The assessee also advanced unsecured loans to other parties and derived interest income there

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of posting advertisement in various publication including newspapers. It has filed its return of income on 29.7.2005 declaring a total income of Rs

In view of the observation, we are of the view that the claim of the assessee could not be rejected merely on the ground that in the books of account the securities were being valued as per the notifications issued by the R.B.I. However, it is not cl

The contentions have carefully been considered. According to well established law, learned CIT (A) is required to dispose of the appeal on merits instead of dismissing the same in limine. We also found that the assessee, due to change of her correspo

The only common issue in these two appeals of revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the disallowance made by Assessing Officer on account of licence fee payable at Rs.9 lacs in each of the years and not treating the same u/s. 43B of the Act

The assessee is a trust running nine educational institutions under various names catering to different kind of education like Management, Engineering, Medial Sciences, Nursing, Pharmacy, etc. It was granted registration u/s 12AA (2) of the Act by CI

At the outset, it was pointed out by the learned AR that the tax effect in the present case is less than Rs. 3 lac. He has produced before us the demand notice according to which the total tax has been computed at Rs. 2,12,781/-. The learned DR could

At the time of hearing before us, it was pointed out by the learned counsel for the assessee that this issue is settled in favour of the assessee for AY 2005-06 because the similar disallowance was made in AY 2005-06. The learned CIT (A) allowed the