Where a remittance is made to a person by way of salary on monthly basis(for services being rendered outside India) to a NRI employed for overseas branch of a firm resident in India. Whether the same is chargeable to tax under the Head Salary in case of such  employee in India or in the country where the employee is based.

read more

Assessed is advisor at Max Life Insurance and during the financial  year 2021-22 assessee received gross commission from Max on the business carried out by assessee was Rd. 21.25 lakhs?  What are requirements under GST Act. Pl. Guide

read more

Facts: – 1) I have contributed Rs 1.80 cr as advance to Builder on sep 2014 and booked a flat. 2) July 2016, another payment of Rs 27.50 lacs was paid 3) July 2018, Building was completed but i didn’t get the possession of premises and dispute filed in  court. 4) Court decide in favour of assessee and in dec 2021 settle their dispute a sum of Rs 3.5 cr. (Rs 2.075 own contribution plus interest) Query: –  Weather the amount of Rs 1,42,50,000 which  is received over and above of own contribution would be consider as “Capital Gain” or ‘Interest’? 2. Payment is received is without deduction of TDS. Is there TDS provision is applicable?

read more

I want to know the TDS section for tds on videography or photography services on the basis of case laws.

read more

Assessee is a partnership firm having Diagnostic services under his brand.  Now for the purpose of growth and expansion of business, has decided to invite investors and has formulated the proposal.  As per the proposal, the new diagnostic center with the brand will be open in various part of city, state and other state.  Entire set up of diagnostics center as well as running the said center will be responsibility of assessee firm. Investor will be paid 15% pa. of their Investment or 10% of Gross receipts of the diagnostics center in which he has invested, which is higher. Is there any implication under GST Act on this model.  Can we say that it is Revenue sharing agreement and therefore,  no GST applicable.  Guide.

read more

My assessee received Form No.5 of VSVS and afterwards in the Income Tax Department Internal Audit or AG Audit came and raised an objection regarding incorrect calculation of interest although completed through ITBA portal. Subsequently the AO issued notice u/s154 and passed order u/s154 raising the tax liability. Is this stand of the department is correct or challengeable in appeal or petition u/s264 may be filed or writ in HC may be filed.. Please suggest..

read more

IF ex parte order is passed u/s 24[4] as above said, Is it possible to get it recalled ?            

read more

read more

Assessee is proprietor engaged in the business as  Gas Agency under Bharat Gas. He has received notice U/sec. 148 for AY. 2013-14 and 2014-15 after 31.03.2021. Assessee filed the Return of Income for both the years and asked for reasons for reopening and copy of proposal  sent for approval before higher authorities and approval granted and also.documents as well as information in possession of AO. AO has provided the issues in reason that assessee has deposited huge cash in Bank account .  Assessee has once again  asked for verbatim copy of reasons , copy of proposal  sent for approval before higher authorities and approval granted and also.documents as well as information in possession of AO. However AO has not provided the same. Meanwhile AO has issued Notice u/Sec. 143(2) and asked certain information. In response to said assessee has submitted that reopening is beyond period of limitation and submitted that considering the nature of business of distribution of LPG to retail customer , assessee has to accept the cash from  customer and provided entire bank statement along with explanation of each debit and credit entry in the bank statement alongwith audited financial statements. Assessee further submitted that cash Depsoits are out of sales proceeds and sales disclosed are more than cash Depsoits in bank. Therefore 148 proceeds based on huge cash deposit in banks is incorrect and with out considering the nature of business, thus with out  application of mind. Now in view of decision of Hon’be  SC has given notice U/Sec. 148A(b) along with information about cash deposit in Bank account and asked to submit response with in two weeks . Whether assessee can submit the reply which he has given earlier about explanation of cash Deposit in Bank. Can assessee raised issue of period of limitation ? Guide.

read more

Assessee is an individual and partner in partnership firm engaged in the business of advertising.  In the A.Y. 2008-09. Assessee received a amount of Rs. 1 cr against his right in the property,  which is liable for longterm capital gain. Assessee invested the amount of Rs. 1.25 cr for purchase of residential bungalow alongwith the land appertatnent their to by executing the Development Agreement and power of attorney  by paying full stamp duty and also taken the possession of the said property.  The assessee has not carried out any Development on said property and after holding for period of 42 months sold the said property as it is and offered the LTCL in A.Y. 2012-13, which is accepted U/sec. 143(1)(a) of the Act. Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the appellant made U/Sec.54F on following grounds 1. Assessee has entered in to Development Agreement and the rights were granted to assessee for Development and sale of flats on the said property. The assessee has not purchase the property for getting deduction u/Sec.54F. 2. When the assessee sold the said property in the A.Y. 2012-13, he has to obtain the consent of original owner. Which means assessee was never the owner of the property and property  was not transfered to assessee. 3. Development Agreement was executed just to avail unreasonable deduction u/Sec. 54F of the Act. 4. Purchase of property is necessary condition for claiming deduction u/Sec. 54F and acquiring property through Development Agreement does not tantamount to purchase of property. 5. By executing  Development Agreement assessee do not became the owner of property. 6. Subsequent acceptance of Long term capital loss on sale of said property in A.Y.2012-13 does not mean assessee has complied with conditions of sec. 54F in A.Y. 2008-09. Is the action of AO is justified in Law.

read more