: CBDT has issued Circular No 11 of 2020 dt . 8-5 -2020 - Clarification in respect of residency under section 6 of the Income -ta At , 1961 ( 2020 ) 423 ITR 40 ( St ). . Taxation and other laws ( Relaxation of Certain Provisions ) Ordinance , 2020 -COVID -19 (… (read more)

If the assessee satisfies all the conditions of the section 10 the assessing officer cannot deny the exemption . There is no estoppel against the law the assessment has to be done as per the law . In CIT v. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC) (382 ) the Court held that , “If… (read more)

The assessee has to file the return under protest and ask for recorded reasons . After getting the recorded reasons the assessee may have to file an objection for the recorded reasons . Follow the law and procedure laid down by GKN Driveshafts ( India ) Ltd v. ITO ( 2003 ) 259 ITR 18… (read more)

You may visit the site under the heading “upload your articles and judgements” . The judgements are up loaded up to 15 -11 -2021 . In the digest Colum the gist of case laws are uploaded regular basis . Till date 9005 case laws are digested the gist are available in the site for reference… (read more)

As we understand, there are three buyers and all of them are contributing towards the purchase of the immovable property. Each buyer has to deduct tax on their share of payments. It is advisable to deduct tax once on the first payment as compared to deducting tax on each instalment as it significantly reduces the… (read more)

In Umesh D. Ganore v. PCT [2019] 263 Taxman 727 / 413 ITR 66 (Bom) High Court following the judgement in Earnest Business Services (P.) Ltd. v. CIT ( 2017 ) 393 ITR 453 ( Bom) ( HC) after considering the Judgement of Delhi High Court in Kumudam Publications P. Ltd. v. CBDT (2017) 393… (read more)

The assessee can make the claim for refund of cash and jewellery seized . Whether the extended period is applicable or not is a debatable issue . As regards the issue of notice under section 148 after 1-4 -2021 the matters are pending before High Court. Allahabad High Court has quashed the proceedings . Ashok… (read more)

In Premchand Jain v.ACIT ( 2020) 183 ITD 372 ( Jaipur ) ( Trib) dealing with section 56(2) (vii) (b ) of the Act has held that if the agricultural land does not fall in definition of capital asset , difference between district level value and sales consideration cannot be brought to tax . The… (read more)

Please refer Kamal Kumar Kalia v. UOI (2020) 268 Taxman 398 / 187 DTR 433 / 313 CTR 779 (Delhi) (HC) the Court held that retired employees of PSUs and nationalised bank cannot be treated as Government employees. Not entitled to get full tax exemption on leave encashment after retirement/superannuation. In KPTCL v. ITO (2018)… (read more)

Allahabad High Court in Ashok Kumar Agarwal & Ors v. UOI ( All ) ( HC) .www.itatonline .org , has held that The delegation authorized being only for the purpose of enlarging limitation under a valid law, such delegation could not be exercised to resurrect the provision of law that stood omitted from the statute… (read more)