Daily Updation 14-10-2014 Yesterday is for m e m o r i e s Tommorow is an i m a g i n a t i o n But Today is REAL GIFT Have a PLEASANT DAY.. GOOD MORNING. -------------------------------------- HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD Section 44AB, read with section 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Compulsory tax audit (Penalty) - Assessment year 1987-88 - Assessing Officer observed that assessee had not obtained audit report well on time, accordingly levied penalty under section 271B - Whether where Assessing Officer failed to record its satisfaction in assessment order pertaining to it and there was no whisper in said assessment order regarding levy of penalty, no penalty would be leviable - Held, yes [Para 11] [In favour of assessee] Commissioner of Income-tax v. E.C.C. Project (P.) Ltd. [2014] 49 taxmann 17 (Allahabad) -------------------------------------- HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Section 54EC, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Not to be charged on investment in certain bonds (Period for investment) - Whether assessees right to make investment within six months cannot be curtailed only for reason of non-availability of specified bonds in market for a period at time of expiry of stipulated six months - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of assessee] Commissioner of Income-tax v. Akbar Ali Dhala* [2014]49 taxmann 202 (Madras) ----------------------------- Service Tax : In case of sale of undivided share of land and subsequent construction of residential complex/units, said subsequent construction would amount to construction for personal use of buyer and, therefore, prima facie, same would not be Construction of Complex Services [2014]49 taxmann 195 (Madras) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Jain Housing v.Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai* -------------------------------------- Service Tax : Where assessee made deposit pending investigation and demand confirmed by department was ultimately set aside, assessee was entitled to refund of said deposit and in case of delay beyond 3 months in grant of refund, assessee would be entitled to interest at rate of 15% per annum [2014]49 taxmann 305 (Punjab & Haryana) HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA LSE Securities Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax Division, Chandigarh* CA. Vinay Mittal, Ghaziabad
Posted on: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 01:51:54 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015