Month: September 2013

Delhi H.C : Where information regarding all transactions were not subject matter of earlier reassessment proceedings and details provided fresh material for Assessing Officer to initiate second reassessment proceedings, second reassessment could not be said to be based upon mere change of opinion

High Court Of Delhi OPG Metals & Finsec Ltd. Vs. CIT Assessment Year : 2003-04 Section : 69B, 147 Sanjiv Khanna And Sanjeev Sachdeva, JJ. Writ Petition (Civil) No. 8283 Of 2010 August  30, 2013 ORDER Sanjiv Khanna, J. – OPG Metals and Finsec Ltd. by this writ petition challenges reassessment notice dated 25th March, 2010 under …

Andhra Pradesh H.C : Where settler of assessee-trust gave a property to trust which was subject to first charge under Estate Duty Act, in view of fact that on acquisition of said property entire compensation amount was appropriated for payment of estate duty arrears, and nothing remained there for utilisation of trust, there was no violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) and 13(3) and, therefore, assessee’s claim for exemption under section 11 was to be allowed

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh CIT, AP-I, Hyderabad VS. Trustees Of Heh The Nizam’s Mukarramjah Trust For Education & Learnings Assessment Years : 1982-83 And 1983-84 Section : 13, 11 Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, Cj. And K.C. Bhanu, J. R.C. No. 53 Of 1993 September  27, 2013 ORDER Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ. – This case has been referred under …

Delhi H.C : Charging a nominal fees by assessee-society from beneficiaries to use coding system and to avail advantages and benefits therein was neither reflective of business aptitude nor indicative of profit oriented intent and thus assessee could not be denied registration under section 10(23C)(iv) on ground that activity of assessee was in nature of trade, commerce or business

High Court Of Delhi Gs1 India VS. DGIT (Exemption) Section : 2(15), 10(23C) Sanjiv Khanna And Sanjeev Sachdeva, Jj. Writ Petition (Civil) No. 7797 Of 2009 September 26, 2013 ORDER Sanjiv Khanna, J. – The petitioner GS1 India it is claimed is a “Not-for-Profit” Society promoted by the Ministry of Commerce and Indian Industry, duly registered …

Delhi H.C : not deciding the issue which was before it namely whether Rs. 3,95,11,874/- being the excise duty on raw material consumed during the year is allowable u/s. 37(1) as claimed by the respondent before A.O.

High Court Of Delhi CIT, Delhi-I Vs. Samtel India Ltd. Assessment Year : 1995-96 Section : 37(1) Sanjiv Khanna And Sanjeev Sachdeva, Jj. It Appeal No. 130 Of 2000 September  26, 2013 ORDER Sanjiv Khanna, J. – This appeal by the Revenue, which pertains to Assessment Year 1995-96, was admitted for hearing vide order dated 30th …

Madras H.C : Where there is more than one authorisation, starting point of limitation is to be computed from last of authorisation which as per Explanation 2 to sub-section (2) of section 158BE is deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded in last panchnama drawn

High Court Of Madras DCIT, Central Circle II(1) Vs. Rakesh Sarin Assessment Years : 1997-98 To 2003-04 Section : 158BE, 132 Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman And T.S. Sivagnanam, Jj. Writ Appeal No. 874 Of 2011 Writ Petition Nos.21071 And 21072 Of 2010 M.P. No. 1 Of 2011 & M.P. Nos. 1 & 2 Of 2010 September  24, …
Malcare WordPress Security