S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend-Fixed deposit-Fiduciary capacity-Protect the interest of company-Addition cannot be made as deemed dividend.
S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend-Fixed deposit-Fiduciary capacity-Protect the interest of company-Addition cannot be made as deemed dividend.
S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend-Not a share holder of holding company-Not taxable as deemed dividend irrespective of their common shareholders.
Companies Act , 2013 .
S. 230 : Composite scheme of arrangement – Demerger – Revenue objected on the ground that the scheme was a tool to avoid and evade taxes – NCLT and NCLAT clarified that Revenue was entitled to take out appropriate proceedings for recovery of any tax statutorily due from the transferor or transferee company or any other liable person – Order of NCLT and NCALT could not interfered with [ S. 231 , 232 ]
Black Money ( Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act , 2015.
S. 10:Assessment – Notice issued based on information received from IT authorities – Order passed under IT Act based on same information was earlier set-aside by the Tribunal on the ground of non-application of mind – Notice issued under BMA was quashed. [ S. 132 153A , Art , 226 ]
S. 279 : Offences and prosecutions – Sanction – Chief Commissioner – Commissioner – Application for compounding of offence – Rejected on the ground of limitation and the fact that assessee was already convicted by Magistrate – Conviction order set aside by CBI Judge and directed a fresh trial – High Court sets aside rejection of compounding application as (i) CBDT Circular had relaxed time limit to file a such application and (ii) second objection no longer survives as the conviction set aside – Revenue to consider the application seeking compounding on its own merit and in accordance with law [ S. 119 , 276CC, 278E, Art , 226 , CRPC , 391 ]
S. 271B :Penalty- Failure to get accounts audited – Stay – Technical glitches Natural justice- Advancement in technology cannot hamper the cause of justice -Directed not to take coercive action [ S. 246A Art , 226 ]
S.271(1)(c): Penalty – Concealment – Mere acceptance of sales figures by VAT Authority cannot be a sufficient ground to hold that the cash sales were in fact genuine so as to delete the levy of penalty . [ S.80IC ]
S. 268A : Appeal –Instructions – Monetary limit less than Rs 2 Crores – Appeal of revenue was dismissed .
S. 260A : Appeal – High Court – Condonation of delay – Substantial justice – Every single day’s delay must be explained does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. [S. 254(1), Limitation Act , S. 5, Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act , 2020 , S. 3 ]
S.234E: Fee-Default in furnishing the statements- Non-filing of TDS statement – Effective from 1-6-2015 – Levy of late fee invalid [ S. 200A, Art 226 ]