Judgements and Orders, Supreme Court and High courts of India

The appellant had paid fees to a Management & Research institute on behalf of one of its director as training fees of director and had also paid salary to the director. Both were disallowed by the Assessing Officer during scrutiny. Aggrieved, the app

An assessee sold his depreciable business asset (a flat) for 35 Lakhs and computed capital gains u/s 50 at Rs. 12.52 Lakhs after deducting the WDV of the block of assets from the sale price received. However, as per the AO, the stamp duty value of th

The Appellant is a manufacturer of products falling under Chapters 56 and 57 of the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. According to the Department, the Appellant had not paid Central Excise Duty on the intermediate product viz. “non-woven fabrics” falli

The assessee Nortel Networks India International Inc. is a company incorporated in USA, a leading supplier of hardware and software productsfor GSM Cellular Radio Telephones System. During the year underconsideration, the assessee has supplied teleco

The assessee had a piece of land which he had sold for Rs. 10 Lakhs and invested the sale proceeds in the bonds specified under Section 54EC.However, the market value of the land as assessed by the District Sub Registrar was Rs. 35 lakhs for the purp

The assesse company is engaged in the business of distributing cable signals. It receives satellite signals from various channel companies like Star Den Media Ltd., U.T.V. Global Broadcasting etc. in the capacity of Multi System Operator. for which t

A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was carried out on 31.07.2008. Assessee filed returns pursuant to notice u/s 153A for the year under consideration declaring long term capital loss of ` 5,87,272/- on sale of flat. As

Assessee company engaged in the business of developing, buildingandimplementing hydroelectric projects on built, own and operate basis declared Nil income for the previous year ended on 31.03.2007.During the course of scrutiny proceedings the AO disa

The Respondent is an investment company in which individual members of the Bilakhia family held equal interest. The family members executed a deed of family arrangement with an objective to consolidate and equalize values of the assets held by each o

The following questions of law have been raised by the Revenue in the appeal.(i) Whether the ITAT erred in law in interpreting the language and provisions of Section 271(1)(c) which only talks of initiation of penalty in “course of any proceedings” a