Is appointment of first auditor for OPC & filing ADT 1 mandatory?

Sir in ais of ITR details of future and options or intraday transaction shows in ais or not

and if it shows I want to know that the future and options I trade that company name is also visible in ais ??

IF BUYER DOES NOT CUT TDS U/S 194Q THEN SELLER WOULD BE LIABILE FOR CUTTING TCS ON SUCH SALES,
WHETHER SELLER WOULD ALSO GET EXEMPTION LIMIT OF 50L IN SUCH CASE OR WOULD BE DIRECTLY LIABLE TO CUT TCS ON REMIANING AMOUNT OF SALES WHICH BIS NOT CUT BY BUYER?

Sir / Madam, Please enlighten. Whether property received from husband's sister under a Release Deed without consideration is taxable? And whether aquisition of property through a Release Deed without consideration from husband's sister is liable to be reported in IT Returns?

As part of supermarket business we have charges some amount from our distributors for display their product, which SAC can we used for issuing invoices in this behalf

how to solve this Since the return is not verified within the time allowed, same is deemed to be never furnished. This one is filed after due date

Should tds be deducted under 194 c or 194 m for the services provided by a tax consultancy firm owned by a propreitor who is not a CA/CMA ?

The Income Tax Online utility for ITR 3 auto-fills the CYLA section without giving us a chance to manually enter or override the setoffs that it has computed.
First, it forcibly sets off Business Loss against other heads without giving us an option to NOT setoff (and carry forward) all or part of the Loss.
Second, it sets off the Business Loss against other heads of Income in a particular order by internal logic - e.g., in a case where there's no Salary or House income, the order used is :
1) OS , 2) STCG (Slab Rate), 3) LTCG (20%), 4) STCG-STT (15%), 5) LTCG-STT (10%).

Now, my question is :
Is the above forcible/no choice behaviour of the Online ITR Utility as per the Income Tax Act ?

My understanding of the IT Act Sections 71 & 72 is that the Assessee may choose to Setoff all or part of his/her Business / Profession Loss against Incomes under certain other Heads in the same year, but is not required to do so. He/she may instead choose to carry forward all or part of the Business Loss for setoff against Incomes under allowed Heads in future years.
Further, section 71 does not specify any particular order of other Heads to be chosen for the setoff. So, the Assessee should be able to choose how much of the Loss to setoff against Incomes under each of the other allowed Heads.

Is my understanding of the IT Law for Loss Setoffs correct ?
If yes, then the ITR Utility is enforcing an extra-judicial rule for Loss setoffs. Although the utility's behaviour & CYLA setoffs order seems logical at first glance, it is not always in the interest of the Assessee as in the following examples :

Example 1 :
There is a Loss under "Profits from Business/Profession", and Income only under LTCG (10%).

In this case, it may be better for the Assessee to carry forward the loss and set it off against next year's Business Profits instead of setting off against this year's LTCG (10%). That would give a return of more than 25% of the Loss carried forward. More interestingly, if you treat the extra Income Tax paid this year by not setting off the Loss (i.e., 10% of the Loss) as an "Investment", and the savings in Tax you could get next year when you setoff the carried forward Loss against next year's Business or OS Income (at 34-35%) as the "Return on Investment", then the ROI is like 250% !! Now, who wouldn't want to take that kind of an "assured" Return on Investment ? And this 250% return is what's being denied to us by the ITR Utility when it forcibly sets off Business Losses in CYLA.

Example 2 :
(Loss) from Business/Profession (F&O Trading Loss) : (10,00,000)
Income from Other Sources (Div, Bank FD & SB Int) : 8,00,000
LTCG from Debt MFs after Indexation (20% Tax) : 9,00,000
Ch VI A Eligible Deductions (80C, 80D, 80TTB) : ( 2,50,000)

In this case, if Rs. 8 L of Business Loss is setoff against OS Income and the remaining 2 L against LTCG (20%), then 7.0 L of LTCG will be taxed at 20% (ignoring surcharges for now). Then, there is no valid source left to deduct the eligible 80C, 80D, 80TTB amounts from, and so you lose those deductions.
If instead, only 5.5 L of Business Loss were setoff against OS Income and 4.5 L were setoff against LTCG (20%), leaving a balance of 2.5L of OS Income, then the Ch. VI A deductions can be taken against the OS Income, and only LTCG of 4.5 L would be taxed at 20%.
That's a tax saving of (7.0 - 4.5) * 20/100 = Rs.50,000 !!

My current case is like Example 2. So, I feel that the Online ITR utility is illegally fleecing me of Rs. 50,000 by computing CYLA in its own way instead of giving me choices as per the IT Act.

Is my feeling justified ? If yes, is there any way to escape this loot by the IT Dept ?
Does anyone here use a 3rd Party ITR utility that allows CYLA to be manually filled/overridden ?

If yes, can anyone here complain to the IT Dept regarding this flaw in their Online ITR utility ?
(The IT Dept is more likely to act on a complain from authoritative sources like experts of the CA Club than from a lay assessee like me.)

Dear Sir

Bank deducted Rs.1770/- under Proprety Insurance so please suggest Pass the entry in books of account under Bank Charges or Under Capital account.

Dear sir

I have received below message from income tax

1. ₹841,478 ,Amount entered in the Income tax return

2.₹0 ,Amount in ₹ As Computed

3. ₹841,478, Variance

Do you agree with the proposed adjustment? *

This is loss amount in our P&L

Please send suitable reply

Regards
Eranna