Special Bench Explains Scope Of Section 153A Assessment & s. 80IA Deduction

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Special Bench Explains Scope Of s. 153A Assessment & s. 80IA Deduction
To: editor@itatonline.org

 

Dear Subscriber,

 

The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.

All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai Special Bench)

Scope of s. 153A & 80IA(4) Explained

 

The Special bench had to consider two issues (i) whether an assessment u/s 153A encompassed additions not based on any incriminating material found during the search and (ii) whether a "Container Freight Station" was an "Inland Port/ Infrastructure facility" for purposes of deduction u/s 80IA(4). HELD by the Special Bench:

(Click Here To Read More)

Regards,

Editor,

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Avani Exports vs. CIT (Gujarat High Court) Retrospective Effect Given to 3rd & 4th Provisos to s. 80HHC is ultra vires

Service tax on Advocates - By CA Lalit Munoyat

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rebecca Andrews <rebecca.andrews88@yahoo.in>
Date: Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 8:48 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Service tax on Advocates - By CA Lalit Munoyat
To:

Click Here:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=1GE923jz5u-0Qp75BDpgWXns7t1uE-cQJEpLY1161zow39pL5W5N7SV-n0auu

Section 43B(f) "Leave Encashment" Law Is Unconstitutional: Kerala High Court

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 10:48 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 43B(f) "Leave Encashment" Law Is Unconstitutional: Kerala High Court
To: editor@itatonline.org

 

Dear Subscriber,

 

The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.

CIT vs. Hindustan Latex Ltd (Kerala High Court)

S. 43B(f) which allows deduction for leave encashment only on payment basis is ultra vires. In any event, it does not cover premium paid to insurer

 

The assessee claimed deduction u/s 37(1) for liability to pay, payment of, premium to LIC under the Group Leave Encashment Scheme policy. The AO allowed the claim though the CIT revised the assessment u/s 263 on the ground that u/s 43B(f), leave encashment was allowable as a deduction only on payment basis. The Tribunal reversed the CIT on the ground that s. 43B(f) had been held to be unconstitutional in Exide Industries 292 ITR 470 (Cal) and that the assessment order was not erroneous. On appeal by the department to the High Court, HELD dismissing the appeal:

(Click Here To Read More)

Regards,

Editor,

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court) Assessee entitled to raise claims not made in ROI before appellate authorities

Retrospective Amendment To S. 80HHC Is Ultra Vires & Illegal: Gujarat High Court

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:39 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Retrospective Amendment To S. 80HHC Is Ultra Vires & Illegal: Gujarat High Court
To: editor@itatonline.org

 

Dear Subscriber,

 

The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.

Avani Exports vs. CIT (Gujarat High Court)

Retrospective Effect Given to 3rd & 4th Provisos to s. 80HHC is ultra vires

 

The Third & Fourth Provisos to S. 80HHC were inserted by the Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2005 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998 to provide that the deduction in respect of exporters having a turnover of more than Rs.10 Crore would be available only if he has evidence to prove that he had an option to choose either duty drawback or DEPB and that he chose DEPB, even when he was entitled to higher benefit under the duty drawback scheme. The assessee claimed that this was an absurd condition because no sensible person would ever exercise the option to choose a scheme under which he would get lesser benefit. The retrospectivity of the amendment was challenged on the basis that it was arbitrary and discriminatory under Articles 14 & 19 of the Constitution. HELD upholding the challenge:

(Click Here To Read More)

Regards,

Editor,

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

CIT vs. Suresh R. Shah (Bombay High Court) Despite speculation activity and short period of holding, shares gain is STCG & not business profits

Simple Guide To Service-tax On Advocates w.e.f. 1.07.2012

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:54 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Simple Guide To Service-tax On Advocates w.e.f. 1.07.2012
To: editor@itatonline.org

 

Dear Subscriber,

Simple Guide To Service-tax On Advocates w.e.f. 1.07.2012

The two successive notifications issued – one providing for "reverse charge" and the other granting an "exemption" – has created confusion amongst the legal fraternity and their clientele. To resolve the confusion, CA Rajkamal Shah, a well known expert in the field, has provided the following clarification:

(Click Here To Read More)

Regards,

Editor,

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

CBDT Press Release On Mandatory E-Filing Of ROI For AY 2012-13

CBDT Press Release On Mandatory E-Filing Of ROI For AY 2012-13

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 5:28 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs CBDT Press Release On Mandatory E-Filing Of ROI For AY 2012-13
To: editor@itatonline.org

 

Dear Subscriber,

CBDT Press Release On Mandatory E-Filing Of ROI For AY 2012-13

The CBDT/ Minsitry of Finance has issued an important press release dated 02.07.2012 explaining the requirements of mandatory e-filing of the ROI for AY 2012-13 and onwards.

(Click Here To Read More)

Regards,

Editor,

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Dear Prime Minister, Scrap GAAR & Vodafone Law & Redeem Yourself

Section 147 Reopening Void If Reasons Supplied After Reassessment Order: ITAT Mumbai

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 147 Reopening Void If Reasons Supplied After Reassessment Order: ITAT Mumbai
To: editor@itatonline.org

 

Dear Subscriber,

 

The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.

Tata International Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

S. 147: Non-supply of recorded reasons before passing reassessment order renders the reopening void. Subsequent supply does not validate reassessment order

 

After completing the s. 143(3) assessment, the AO received information from the Volcker Committee report that the assessee had paid "illegal" commission for supply of goods to Iraq under the "Oil for Food Programme" of the UN. The AO issued a s. 148 notice to disallow the commission and supplied the assessee with only the "gist" of the recorded reasons. The complete recorded reasons were furnished only after the passing of the reassessment order. In the reassessment order, the AO disallowed the commission. The CIT (A) upheld the reassessment. On appeal by the assessee to the Tribunal, HELD allowing the appeal:

(Click Here To Read More)

Regards,

Editor,

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Monthly Digest of Imp Case Laws (May 2012) is available for download