Month: April 2011

Archive for April, 2011


CIT vs. Swaraj Mazda Ltd (P&H High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: April 6, 2011 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

The AO had issued a certificate u/s 195(2) authorizing the remittance without deduction of tax at source. As this certificate was not cancelled u/s 195(4), the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source and could not be treated as assessee in default. The issue whether the payments were taxable or not need not be gone into

Rajesh Keshav Pillai vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: April 5, 2011 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Though s. 54 refers to capital gains arising from “transfer of a residential house”, it does not provide that the exemption is available only in relation to one house. If an assessee has sold multiple houses, then the exemption u/s 54 is available in respect of all houses if the other conditions are fulfilled

Synergy Entrepreneur Solutions Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: April 4, 2011 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

The reason given for the revision in the s. 263 order (that speculation loss cannot be set-off against other income) is different from the reason set out in the show-cause notice (that the AO has not verified the issue). If a ground of revision is not mentioned in the show-cause notice, it cannot be made the basis of the order for the reason that the assessee would have had no opportunity to meet the point (Maxpack Investments 13 SOT 67 (Del), G.K. Kabra 211 ITR 336 (AP) & Jagadhri Electric Supply 140 ITR 490 (P&H) followed)

Top