In ITO vs. Dharam Narain, the Supreme Court has held that if the assessee is not available to take service of the s. 143(2) notice, service on the authorized representative is sufficient to draw inference of deemed service of notice on the assessee. It was also held that the fact that the authorized representative is disowned by the assessee is irrelevant. CA Dev Kumar Kothari has carefully analyzed the judgement. He argues that the judgement is wrong and requires reconsideration. He has made good his assertion by giving detailed reasons

CA Yash V. Rajpurohit has compiled a list of all important due dates in March 2018, and the statutory obligations which require to be complied with within the said deadline. The checklist will help taxpayers and professionals ensure that they do not miss out on any obligation which may attract penal consequences

Advocate Sunil Moti Lala, assisted by CA Tushar Hathiramani, has prepared a compilation of 2000 important judgments on transfer pricing (1,200 cases), International Tax (109 cases) and Domestic Tax (691 cases) reported in the period from January to December 2017. The author has meticulously and systematically classified the judgments into various categories to enable ease of reference. The appeal numbers in most cases have been provided so as to enable the judgements to be retrieved from the website of the respective Court or Tribunal. A PDF copy of the digest is available for download. The digest will prove invaluable to all practitioners of taxation law

CA Mayank Mohanka has argued that it not fair for the income-tax authorities to launch prosection u/s 276B for failure to deposit TDS within time even in cases where the delay is for short periods and there are bona fide reasons for the delay. He pleads that the authorities should focus on wilful and habitual defaulters and spare innocent defaulters