COURT: | Bombay High Court |
CORAM: | G. S. Kulkarni J, S. C. Dharmadhikari J |
SECTION(S): | 143(3), 194-J |
GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
CATCH WORDS: | TDS reconciliation, Undisclosed Income |
COUNSEL: | Percy Pardiwala |
DATE: | March 18, 2014 (Date of pronouncement) |
DATE: | May 17, 2016 (Date of publication) |
AY: | 2006-07 |
FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
CITATION: | |
Inability of the assessee, an Advocate, to reconcile the professional receipts with the TDS certificates and to give a detailed party-wise breakup of fees receipts does not mean that the difference can be assessed as undisclosed income |
The assessee was engaged as an Advocate to argue the matters by what is popularly known as Advocates on record or instructing Advocates method, meaning thereby the client does not engage the assessee directly but a professional or the Advocate engaged by the client requests the assessee to argue the case. The brief is then taken as the counsel brief. That being the practice, the assessee gave an explanation that the breakup as desired cannot be given and with regard to all payments. It is pointed out that at times, assessee receives fees directly from the clients or from the instructing Advocates or Chartered Accountants if such professionals have collected the amounts from the clients. Under these circumstances, the breakup as desired cannot be placed on record
Recent Comments