AAR must reply to the specific question raised before them: Bombay HC
0
AAR must reply to the specific question raised before them: Bombay HC Short summary of the case of Bombay…
provisions of section 23
Recent Posts
- Substantive compliance overrides procedural requirements: No Penalty u/s 270A for the simple reason that Assessee did not file Form No. 68 but made application on plain paper
- AO cannot issue 2nd notice under section 148A (b) as supplement to first notice, raking up new issue without independently satisfying the time lime and monetary limit
- Addition purely based on third-party non-compliance is unwarranted: ITAT Ahemedabad.
- Loss on sale of shares on Stock Exchange can be set off against LTCG from sale of unlisted shares if STT is paid on quoted shares even if LTCG on shares Exempt U/s 10(38): ITAT Kolkata
- Surcharge on income tax applicable only on income exceeding ₹50 Lakhs and not to be considered for MMR if income is below the limit: ITAT Kolkata
- Discrepancies in reporting in number of Board Meeting in MGT-7A vis a vis Board meetings – ROC imposed monetary penalty on a Company
- Disallowance of Rebate under section 87A for Small Taxpayers: A Call for Clarity
- Non-appointment of at least one woman director on the board under section 149 – ROC imposed fine on 3 companies
- Intimation under Section 143(1) issued without providing an opportunity to the assessee, violates the principles of natural justice and hence unsustainable: ITAT Banglore.
- Clearance of PF/ESI payment after the due date due to technical glitches/server issues is allowable as deduction: ITAT Ahemedabad
