S. 36(1)(va) : Any sum received from employees-Employees’ contribution to provident fund and employees’ state insurance corporation-Delay in depositing-Deduction allowable. [S. 37(1)]
S. 36(1)(va) : Any sum received from employees-Employees’ contribution to provident fund and employees’ state insurance corporation-Delay in depositing-Deduction allowable. [S. 37(1)]
S. 36(1)(iii) : Interest on borrowed capital-Fresh loan taken for repaying loan taken earlier-Interest paid on fresh loan allowable as deduction.
S. 32 : Depreciation-Temporary discontinuance of business-Lull in the business-New assets acquired during the year-Depreciation allowable.
S. 32 : Depreciation-Car parked at premises of managing director-Gym Equipment-Depreciation cannot be disallowed on the ground that it was used by the managing director.
S. 32 : Depreciation-Computer software-Intangible asset-Entitle to depreciation at 60%.
S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Running Hospital, Pharmacy and Diagnostic Centre-Maintaining separate books of account-Receiving subsidies from Government-Denial of exemption was not justified. [S. 2(15), 12AA, 13]
S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-No changes in the nature of activities-Principle of consistency should be followed-Mutuality-Once the activities of the assessee-society were charitable, the principle of mutuality became superfluous. [S. 2(15) 12, 12A, 13]
S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Change of opinion – Subsidy – Provision for expenses – Query raised during assessment proceedings – Reply filed – It is not necessary that the assessment order should contain reference or discussion in the assessment order -Order was quashed – Court observed that the order of disposal of objections in to 21 pages and referring 68 case laws without referring the issue under consideration – Faceless Assessing Officer has only wasted his time in writing unsustainable order on objections . [ S. 4, 37(1)), 143(3), 148 ,Art , 226 ]
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -capital or revenue receipt – Subsidy – Order of the Assessing Officer accepting the receipt as capital receipt was ex facie erroneous and potentially prejudice to revenue – Order of the High Court remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer was affirmed [ S. 4 ]
S. 148 : Reassessment –Notice – No valid service – Reassessment was bad in law – Service of notice on Advocate , Chartered Accountant or an employee not authorised is not an valid service . [ S. 292BB , CPC 1908 Order ,5 ]