• Welcome to itatonline.org Forum.


ITAT issues guidelines for stay of demand.

Main Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - ketanvyas1975

Discussion / Re: query on undisclosed income
March 13, 2014, 08:06:24 PM
can you please given citation of few judgments wherein such kind of addition was deleted on the ground of absence of cross examination? Thanks in advance.
Discussion / query on undisclosed income
March 11, 2014, 06:36:59 PM
A sales a plot of land to B. In the course of search in case of B, admission of on money payment is given by B on the basis of a chit found from him. B also adheres to the admission and pay tax thereon. Now the department wish to apply this admission to A as natural corollary. Cross examination is demanded but the same may not be granted. 

My question is can a third party statement and material obtained from the possession of a third party be directly applied to the case of an assesse?

Please give your reply/share views with proper judgments. I shall be thankful for the same.
You may have an option to file RTI application to CIT office. If the old records suggest that you were registered and registration number is there, the claim of exemption has to be granted. The A.O. may be made aware that it is the registration and not the registration certificate which is essential for exemption as per the Act.
Discussion / Re: Employee contribution of PF and ESI
January 18, 2014, 05:56:27 PM
Yes. Manojbhai has given very convincing reply. Although the decision is against the assessee, the same appears to be the correct position of the law.
Discussion / Re: TDS u/s 195 query
November 26, 2013, 05:29:26 PM
I agree with the above but my question is (1) whether payment for subscription for receiving statistics etc. for business purpose will amount to royalty or not. if it is royalty, it is surely taxable in india and hence TDS will be deductible (2) of it is royalty, tax of 10% as prescribed in DTAA will apply or as prescribed in section 206AA?
Discussion / TDS u/s 195 query
November 19, 2013, 01:46:42 PM
My client wants to make payment of subscription money to a foreign entity for a periodical (magazine) supplying international prices and statistics of commodity for its business purpose. Whether TDS u/s 195 will apply in such a case? Whether the payment can be termed as royalty for supply of information u/s 9 of the Income Tax Act?

There is DTAA with the country of recipient as per which rate of deduction for Royalty shall not exceed 10%. However, the recipient does not have PAN and hence section 206AA shall apply as per which the rate is 20%. In such a case, what will be the rate of deduction?
What will be the due date for tax audit in a case where domestic transfer pricing is applicable?
I think it is 30th November. The reason is due date for return is now specified date u/s 44AB and therefore due date in this case being 30th November, the specified date for section 44AB will also be 30th November. However, some people are still expressing doubts in this regard. I request the members to give opinion on this. Thank you to all in advance.
as i understand from the above is that the issue is still wide open for interpretation. Isn't it?
can anyboday please guide me in the matter?
thank you Manojji for your prompt response. I understand that the said amendment has changed the method of taxability of interest on enhanced compensation from yearwise accrual to year of receipt. However, my question is what will be the colour of interest u/s 28 on such enhanced compensation? will it be a part of compensatiom as held by Supreme Court in case of Ghanshyam (HUF) 315 ITR 1 ? or it will be an interest simplicitor to be dealt with under section 145A, 56 & 57 as per the said amendment. In both the cases, the taxability will differ. Please give your valuable views on this question. Thank you in anticipation.
can anybody throw light on this issue? we shall be thankful for the guidance
Supreme Court in case of Ghanshyam (HUF) - 315 ITR 1 held that interest under section 28 of land acquisition act is accretion to the value of compensation and hencec it is part and parcel of compensation. Thus, taxability of interest u/s 28 will be same as compensation. BOth together will fall under the head capital gains.

However, amendment made in section 145 and section 56 and 57 prescribe that interest on such enhanced compensation will be taxable under the head income from other source in the year of receipt with a deduction of 50% under section 57.

Does it mean that the above Supreme Court judgment in the context of interest under section 28 is no longer valid and now the amendment will be the new mode of calculation?

If yes, what will be the position of interest which accured to aassessee befoe the amendment sdue to judgment of civil court but received after the said date?

We have some confusion and hence we request learned friends and respected seniors on this forum to clarify this issue.
Discussion / Re: Guide for successful Mediation
April 09, 2013, 08:40:09 AM
Dear Shri bpagarwal,

You have been sharing nice infomration with us and I thank you for the same. However, I request you to confine the same only to direct taxes as this forum is mainly for that purpose. What happens is the question of direct taxes raised by members lose sight of the others due to many posts on other subjects and the queriest do not get solutions of their query. This is unwarranted situation as far as the objective of this forum is concerned. Person like me try to get answers of questions through discussion with others and also try to solve queries of others if posible on our part. So it is desirable that queries/issues of only direct taxes are posted and their solutions are obtained through discussion with other members across the country. This is my humble request to you with an urge not to misunderstand me. Thank you.
please refer supreme court judgment in case of P K Badiani wherein concept of accumulated profit for the purpose of deemed dividend is explained. This  impliedly addresses your requirement.
Discussion / Re: exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad)
March 16, 2013, 12:06:55 PM
any other expert views in the matter?