June 2016

Sec. 245BA

Madras H.C : the petitioners filed another application on 10.07.2015 for the same assessment years requesting the Commission to take up the matter and consider the same and this application was rejected by order dated 15.07.2015 and the Commission has stated that the petitioners have re-submitted their applications along with circulars issued by the CBDT

/

High Court Of Madras Arun Mammen vs. Union Of India Section 245BA T.S. Sivagnanam, J. W.P. Nos. 22216 To 22219

Section 45

Karnataka H.C : The assessing authority is not right in treating profit derived of Rs.10,66,425/- on sale of shares under the head business income and not under the head capital gains when the assessing authority has rightly treated the same as business income considering the intention of assessee for making profit by making investments in shares and materials on record which disclosed that assessee is a trader in stocks

/

High Court Of Karnataka Pr. CIT, Bangalore vs. Telestar Investments (P.) Ltd. Section 45 Assessment Year 1997-98 Jayant Patel And

Section 43B, Sec. 145A, Section 263

Karnataka H.C : The Commissioner was not justified in passing the order u/s. 263 of the Act on the ground that the order of assessment was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue as Assessing Officer has followed one of the permissible views in allowing the deduction of excise duty but without considering the fact that assessee has claimed such deduction twice

/

High Court Of Karnataka CIT, Bangalore vs. NCR Corporation India (P.) Ltd. Section : 43B, 145A, 263 Assessment Year :

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security