RAHUL SHARMA

Saturday, September 4, 2021

AO can’t tax whole profit in first year if part of payment is to be received only after completion of project: ITAT

INCOME TAX : Where assessee had entered into a MoU with SIPL to invest in project to be executed by SIPL and SIPL was to complete project and help assessee to market and sell flats, since project was not completed in present assessment year and, promised payments against project was part of total agreed sales proceeds when project was completed, Assessing Officer could not have brought whole profit of project to tax in first year of execution of MoU

from www.taxmann.com Latest Case Laws https://www.taxmann.com/research/direct-tax-laws/top-story/101010000000316080/ao-can’t-tax-whole-profit-in-first-year-if-part-of-payment-is-to-be-received-only-after-completion-of-project-itat.aspx

Friday, September 3, 2021

Amount charged for non-availability of machine as per agreement can't be termed as consideration to tolerate an act: CESTAT

CUSTOMS/EXCISE/ST : Where assessee set up a project for generating electricity using Wind Turbine Generators (WTG) and it under an agreement entered into with one 'S' engaged 'S' to maintain said WTG and there had been a machine availability clause in above agreement that in case machine availability falls then 'S' shall compensate to assessee an amount and assessee received an amount of Rs. 1.33 crores from 'S' in year 2015-16 and showed same in its account books,

from www.taxmann.com Latest Case Laws https://ift.tt/3taAjA5

SLP dismissed against HC order holding that restriction to issue advance authorization for gold medallions and coins was beyond powers of DGFT

EXCISE/ST/VAT : SLP dismissed against Impugned order of High court holding that public notice issued by Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) which put restrictions upon issuance of advance authorization for gold medallions and coins, was beyond power and jurisdiction of DGFT

from www.taxmann.com Latest Case Laws https://ift.tt/3jGY9An

Amount received under machine availability clause in agreement for non-availability can't be termed as consideration to tolerate an act: CESTAT

Refund of amount recovered by dept. against demand order allowed if assessee filed appeal against such order with pre-deposit: CESTAT

CUSTOMS/EXCISE/ST : Where assessee against order of Commissioner (Appeals) filed appeal before Tribunal after payment of 10 per cent disputed amount of tax and thereafter it filed an application seeking refund of disputed amount of tax recovered by Adjudicating Authority from its bank account, after mandatory pre deposit of 10 per cent department had no right to retain amount recovered from assessee's bank account

from www.taxmann.com Latest Case Laws https://ift.tt/3kTLPvM

Reassessment notice issued on last day is valid if it was dispatch after limitation period due to public holiday: HC

INCOME TAX : Where Assessing Officer issued reopening notice against assessee for assessment year 2011-12 on 31-3-2018 which was last date for reopening of assessment and it was despatched on same day, however, franking was done by postal department on 2-4-2018, in view of fact that 1-4-2018 was a sunday, for all purposes reopening notice was issued within period of limitation

from www.taxmann.com Latest Case Laws https://ift.tt/3tbkx81

Chhattisgarh HC upholds issuance of sec. 148 notice under old provisions after 31-03-2021

INCOME TAX: Notice was issued under section 148 to assessee on 30-6-2021, however, when notice under section 148 was issued, power to issue notice was preceded with a new provision of law by amendment of Finance Act, 2021 and thereby section 148 was to be read with section 148-A which prescribed that before issuing notice under section 148,

from www.taxmann.com Latest Case Laws https://ift.tt/2WTkNNh