Judgements by CS Bijoy
View Full Profile
Accounting Standard 14 is applicable only on ammalgation not on demerger
CS Bijoy 30 July 2012 at 13:06
This petition has been filed under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (the Act) by Sony India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as petitioner/transferor company), in respect of a scheme of arrangement (scheme for short) between the
I have carefully considered the assessment order and the submissions made by the ld. AR in this regard. As per the facts of this case, the appellant company is a 100% subsidiary of the holding company M/s McCann-Erickson (India) Pvt. Ltd. M/s McCann
Brief facts are that the assessee is a cooperative society engaged in the construction of about 476 flats. It has claimed that due to dispute between different groups of members, complaints were made for violation of cooperative group housing society
Before passing any order provision of section 250(6) to be consider
CS Bijoy 27 July 2012 at 12:14
At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of assessee has submitted a copy of the adjournment petition made before ld.CIT(A) dated 09.02.2011 and submitted that the ld. CIT(A)’s observations that no applications for adjournment were
Rebate under section 88E is to be allowed from tax computed under section 115JB
CS Bijoy 27 July 2012 at 12:14
That without prejudice to Ground No. 1 above , the l earned Commissioner of Income Tax erred in holding that the Assessing Of f ice r failed to consider the applicability of provisions of sect ion 115JB of the Income Tax Act , 1961 when the tax payab
That the Ld. CIT(A) was unjustified in confirming the addition of Notional Interest of Rs.7.18 Crore allegedly due from M/s. V. B. Desai & Co. without any cogent reasons. 1.1. That the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that after the judgment of the Sp
The Petitioner Trust owns the premises at E-10, Block E, Inner Circle, Connaught Place, New Delhi (‘the premises’). The Petitioner leased out the said premises to the Respondent by a lease deed dated 25th April 2007. The lease was for an initial peri
As per section 36(1)(vii) of the IT bad debts written off was liable to be allowed
CS Bijoy 25 July 2012 at 12:23
The fact of the case is the whether the assessee eligible to allowed deduction for bad debt written off.
At the time of hearing the ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 41 days. It was submitted that the assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay to which revenue has not raised a
The circumstances of the case the Ld. C.l.T(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,48,90,366/- with processing charges without properly appreciating the facts that all the receipts were not on account processing charges and other fa
CAclubindia
