Two appeals had been filed by the revenue, while the third appeal had been filed by the assessee. The revenue had filed appeals for both the assessment years, i.e., 1997-98 and 1998-99, while the assessee had filed an appeal only qua assessment year
The High Court, vide its impugned Judgment and Order dated 25.07.2005, has declared that Section 87(m)(ii) (b) of Finance (No.2) Act, 1998 is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India insofar as it seeks to deny the benefit of the ‘Kar Viv
Circumstances of the case in confirming the order of the CIT(A) whereby the CIT(A) held that since the interest paid on borrowed funds is more than the interest received on FDR, therefore, 90% of the gross interest received from FDR should not be re
Whether the penalty under section 271(1)(C)of the Income Tax Act. can be raised after the disclosure made by the Assessee of his full income without the presence of proper evidence.
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT erred in holding that Assessee was not in default under Section 201(1) and not liable for interest for lower deduction of TDS under Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 19
This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the said Act‟) has been preferred by the revenue being aggrieved by the judgment and / or order dated 22.02.2008 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in r
This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act is at the instance of an assessee and is directed against order dated March 30, 2001, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” Bench, Calcutta, in Income-tax Appeal bearing IT (SS) A No.69/
HC dismissed the appeal and allow the Respondent to collect the penalty
HC dismissed the appeal against the order of Tribunal on deduction under section 80IB
HC dismissed the appeal and protect the order of Tribunal on reassessment under section 147
Live Course on Invoice Management System (IMS) - 2nd Batch(With Recording)