The following important judgements are available for download at itatonline.org.
CIT vs. Tip Top Typography (Bombay High Court)
S. 23(1)(a): Entire law on determination of "annual value" explained
(i) We are not in agreement with the department that the municipal rateable value cannot be accepted as a bonafide rental value of the property and it must be discarded straightway in all cases. There cannot be a blanket rejection of the same. If that is taken to be a safe guide, then, to discard it there must be cogent and reliable material;
(ii) The market rate in the locality is an approved method for determining the fair rental value but it is only when the AO is convinced that the case before him is suspicious, determination by the parties is doubtful that he can resort to enquire about the prevailing rate in the locality. The municipal rateable value may not be binding on the AO but that is only in cases of afore referred nature. It is definitely a safe guide;
Tax Lawyers Association vs. State of U.P (Allahabad High Court)
Interim order passed that non-advocates cannot appear before VAT authorities or advertise services regarding filing of returns/ arguing
As an interim measure, we direct the respondents that no person whosoever, may be permitted to advertise in the Newspaper or any leaflet, inviting assesses for the purpose of filing of return or arguing before the authority under the VAT Act. Any person, who is not a registered advocate, shall not be permitted to appear before the Authority under the VAT Act
Regards,
Editor,
---------------------
Latest:
M/s Unique Artage vs. UOI (Rajasthan High Court)
Statutory body like the ITAT is expected to show consistency. Change in constitution of Bench does not mean diametrically opposite views can be taken
No comments:
Post a Comment