Month: April 2018

Dr. Ashok Saraf, Senior Advocate, has deliberated upon the important question whether the police has power to investigate cognizable offences under the GST Act, 2017 (both Central as well as State) by taking resort to the provisions of section 4(2) …

GST Act: Power Of Police To Investigate Offenses Read More »

The CBDT has prescribed a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to be followed by AOs while issuing notices u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for reopening of assessments. The SOP is designed to ensure that the AO addresses issues such as ‘change of opinion’, ‘failure to disclose’ etc so as to make the reopening foolproof and immune to challenge by taxpayers. CA Vinay Kawdia has studied the SOP and suggested changes and additions thereto so as to ensure that the objectives of the CBDT are met

Advocate Dr. P. Daniel has conducted a systematic study of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 as amended in 2016. Apart from referring to all the important statury provisions and judicial pronouncements on the subject, the author has answered FAQs which throw light on the precise legal consequences of the enactment

Tagged with:

Advocate Paras S. Savla has explained the modus operandi used by unscrupulous taxpayers to launder their unaccounted black money with the aid of bogus capital gains from Penny Stocks. He has also explained the relevant statutory provisions and discussed all the important judgements on the point. He has, however, cautioned that all cases of capital gains from penny stocks cannot be branded by the authorities as bogus and offered advice on what precautions taxpayers should take to avoid being wrongly assessed to tax

Tagged with: ,

CA Jyoti Gupta has considered the question whether disallowance u/s 14A can be made in a case where exempt income is earned from stock-in-trade and strategic investments in the context of the recent judgement of the Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT 91 154 (SC)

In Shanti Ramanand Sagar vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 245, the Bombay High Court has upheld the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Advocate Rahul Hakani has explained the judgement in …

S. 271(1)(c) Penalty | Judgement Of Bombay High Court In Shanti Ramanand Sagar Explained Read More »