S. 45 (4) : Capital gains – Firm -Retirement of partners-On contribution the individual property to firm, it is the property of the firm – Tribunal is justified in assessing the capital gains in the assessment of the firm.[ S.45 ]
S. 45 (4) : Capital gains – Firm -Retirement of partners-On contribution the individual property to firm, it is the property of the firm – Tribunal is justified in assessing the capital gains in the assessment of the firm.[ S.45 ]
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Business promotion-Failure to produce supporting evidence–Disallowance of 50% of expenses are held to be justified.
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Finance lease-Operating lease – Accounting Standard 19 – Matter remanded to Appellate Tribunal [S. 254(1)]
S. 12A : Registration –Trust or institution- Anaesthesia speciality – Education programme and research work in larger perspective were going to benefit public at large – Entitled for registration [ S.2(15) ]
S. 10(12) : Accumulated balance–Recognised provident fund – Accumulated balance lying in provident fund of assessee upto retirement is eligible for exemption.
S. 2(24) : Income – Concept of real income- Statutory levy under the VAT Act, 2005 is being collected by virtue of the powers entrusted by the State Government to the assessee- entire collection is deposited in the Government Treasury of the State after deducting the actual expenditure incurred by the assessee- No real income accrues to the society-Not necessary to get registration u/s 12AA of the Act. [S. 4, 5, 12AA]
S. 2(ea) : Assets-Urban land-Belonging—Ownership-Owner-Pendency of litigation regarding ownership of land is pending for adjudication—Possession with assessee-Includible in net wealth– Protective assessment is held to be valid.
S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Tax consultant was indisposed about 7 months due to serious back injury–Delay was condoned–Matter remanded back for disposal on merits. [S. 153A]
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Doctrine of merger—Relief granted by CIT (A)-Revision to consider eligibility of exemption is held to be not valid [ S.10A(2)(ii), 10A(2)(iii)]
S. 260A : Appeal-High Court–Delay of 362 days-Difference of opinion between two officers–Appeal was filed on the basis of legal opinion-Delay was condoned and remanded the matter to High Court to decide on merits- Cost of Rs. 1 lakh is awarded on department which is to be paid to the assessee.