Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Dishonour of “AT PAR” Cheques,which court has jurisdiction to try case? Leading Bombay high court judgment


Giving huge relief to the Creditors, Bombay High Court held that Dis-honour of “AT PAR” Cheque cases can be filed to the Court within whose local jurisdiction the nearest available branch of bank of the drawer situated.

Dishonour of “AT PAR” Cheque; Complaint can be filed in the Court within whose local jurisdiction the nearest available branch of Drawer’s bank situated. SC Judgment in Dashrath v. State is not applicable to “AT PAR” Cheques

It is thus clear that in the present case by issuing cheques payable at all branches, the drawer of the cheques had given an option to the banker of payee to get the cheques cleared from the nearest available branch of bank of the drawer. It, therefore, follows that the cheques have been dishonoured within the territorial jurisdiction of Court of Metropolitan Magistrate at Kurla. In view of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Dashrath v. State of Maharashtra, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate of Kurla Court has jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint in question”.

Mr.Ramanbhai Mathurbhai Patel
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Anr.

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2362 OF 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE

CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI J.
DATED : 25TH AUGUST, 2014
http://www.lawweb.in/2014/08/dishonour-of-at-par-chequeswhich-court.html
2
Discussion / Re: Taxation of Carbon Credits
« Last post by pawansingla on August 29, 2014, 09:41:44 pm »
That,s correct.let see how the cat jumps.
3
Discussion / Re: Taxation of Carbon Credits
« Last post by satyanveshi on August 28, 2014, 05:53:15 am »
Since the Hyd ITAT decision is upheld by High Court of AP which was reported in 365 ITR 82, the decision of Cochin Bench need not be followed and the decision of AP High Court will have precedent value till it is reversed by Supreme Court. Further, in the recent Finance Act also, legislature is silent on this aspect and only in DTC, a provision was incorporated in the section equivalent to sec. 28 that carbon credits are taxable. Anyhow, the issue will take an interesting twist, once  the Kerala High court uphelds the decision of ITAT Cochin bench in future. Till that time the public at large  will argue the AP High Court decision is correct  and the revenue will take support from the decision of Cochin Bench. This will open another pandoras box...............
4
Discussion / Re: Taxation of Carbon Credits
« Last post by pawansingla on August 27, 2014, 03:49:01 pm »
IT: Income on sale of Certified Emission Reduction/carbon credit which is admittedly a benefit arising out of business of assessee, would fall within definition of 'income' under section 2(24)(vd) and, thus, it is chargeable to tax

IT: Even though income on sale of Certified Emission Reduction/carbon credit would form part of profit and gains of business, yet it cannot be treated as profit 'derived from' industrial undertaking and, therefore, assessee was not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA in respect of said income

■■■

[2014] 47 taxmann.com 416 (Cochin - Trib.)

IN THE ITAT COCHIN BENCH

Apollo Tyres Ltd.

v.

Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Cir. 1(1), Kochi*

N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IT (TP) APPEAL NO. 4 (COCH.) OF 2013
[ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09]
MARCH  7, 2014
II. Section 2(24) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income - Definition of (Carbon credit) - Assessment year 2008-09 - Whether income on sale of Certified Emission Reduction/carbon credit which is admittedly a benefit arising out of business of assessee, would fall within definition of 'income' under section 2(24)(vd) and, thus, it is chargeable to tax - Held, yes [Para 53] [In favour of revenue]

III. Section 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Profits and gains from infrastructure undertakings (Computation of deduction) - Assessment year 2008-09 - Whether even though income on sale of Certified Emission Reduction/carbon credit would form part of profit and gains of business, yet it cannot be treated as profit 'derived from' industrial undertaking and, therefore, assessee was not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA in respect of said income - Held, yes [Para 57] [In favour of revenue]
5
Discussion / Re: Section 133A survery power for TDS matters
« Last post by cankgoyal on August 22, 2014, 08:04:59 pm »
earlier in section 133A survey only in the business premises of the assessee. Therefore, in case of Govt. offices TDS survey by the assessing officer where no business activity carried on may be void and illegal. To overcome this new section intoduced
6
There has been a spate of S.263 proceedings in Kolkata against investment companies raising share capital and assessments done by the A.Os have been set aside for re-doing. As many as 400-plus S. 263 orders are under challenge before ITAT, Kolkata in respect of A.Y :2008-2009 and many more such orders have been challenged for subsequent years. First  order on one such case has been passed on 14 th August,2014 holding S. 263 proceedings valid on account of lack of proper enquiry by the A.O.
See full text at:
www.subashagarwal.blogspot.in
7
Discussion / Section 133A survery power for TDS matters
« Last post by cankgoyal on August 14, 2014, 10:29:41 am »
By amendment in section 133A now power is given that an income-tax authority may for the purpose of verifying that tax has been deducted or collected at source in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XVII-B or Chapter XVII-BB, as the case may be( w.e.f. 01-10-2014)

whether earlier TDS survey done by the Assessing Officer (TDS) are without any authority under the Act and  thefeore illegal, null and void.
9
Discussion / When income tax officer should not impose penalty on assessee ?
« Last post by bpagrawal on August 12, 2014, 10:03:49 am »
When income tax officer should not impose penalty on assessee ?
SUBMITTED BY; PRAKASH JOTWANI

In the case of Reliance Petroproducts Ltd., (supra), the Hon’ble
Supreme Court held that in order to be covered by the provisions of section
271(1)(c), there has to be concealment of particulars of income by the
assessee or furnishing of in-accurate particulars of his income. Explaining
further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that when no information given
in the return is found to be in-correct or in-accurate, the assessee cannot be
held guilty of furnishing in-accurate particulars of its income and unless the
case is strictly covered by the provision, the penalty cannot be imposed. It is
further held that where there is no finding that the particulars furnished by
the assessee in its return are in-accurate or erroneous or false, there is no

question of imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the act merely because the claim
of the assessee for deduction is disallowed in the quantum proceedings.
Keeping in view the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of Reliance Petroproducts Ltd. (supra) and having regard to all the facts of the
case as discussed above, we are of the view that the present case is not a fit
case to impose penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) is not
justified in confirming the penalties imposed by the A.O. for both the years
under consideration.


IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E”
BENCH,
MUMBAI
BEFORE S/SHRI H.L. KARWA, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND P.M. JAGTAP, AM
I.T.A. No.2559 /Mum/2013

Assessment Year : 2003-2004

Salman Khan,

3, Galaxy Apts.,
Vs.
B.J. Road, Band Stand,
Bandra (W),
Mumbai – 400 050.


Date of Pronouncement : 30-7-2014
O R D E R
PER BENCH.
http://www.lawweb.in/2014/08/when-income-tax-officer-should-not.html
10
Discussion / Whether issue of limitation can be decided as preliminary issue?
« Last post by bpagrawal on August 09, 2014, 04:00:50 pm »
Whether issue of limitation can be decided as preliminary issue?


We have not expressed any opinion with regard to the
issue of limitation except saying that the present issue could
not have been taken up as a preliminary issue.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5954 2014
(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 33200 of 2014)
Satti Paradesi Samadhi & Philliar Temple

Versus
M. Sankuntala (D) Tr. Lrs. & Ors.

Dipak Misra
Dated;July 03, 2014.
-http://www.lawweb.in/2014/08/whether-issue-of-limitation-can-be.html
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10