Home Highlights October 2012 Year 2012 This

You may also like:

1. Assessee filed second rectification application u/s 254, raising same grounds as first miscellaneous application which was already rejected. Tribunal held that except...

2. Deduction u/s 80IA - first time claimed in the revised return - Amendment vide Finance Act, 2020 - this issue was never an issue pointed out to the assessee at any...

3. Faceless Assessment - Whether it cannot be gainsaid that one day time given qua SCN is too short - The first point urged i.e., a mere one day time qua SCN under the...

4. Rejection of Application for Final Approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) - The Tribunal observed that the CBDT Circular extending the date for final applications did not apply to...

5. The Tribunal held that in a case involving a requisition u/s 132A of the Act, the jurisdiction to complete the assessment is governed by the provisions of Section 153A....

6. Scope of the "Point of difference" - Divergent views of the members of tribunal - matter referred to third member - appellant sight that more points to be included in...

7. Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Period of limitation - The audit party is entitled to point out a factual error or omission in the assessment. reopening of the...

8. The key points covered in the summary are: The assessee claimed tax deducted at source (TDS) on prize winnings from unsold lottery tickets as business income and set off...

9. Penalty levied u/s 221(1) - non-payment of tax - In the instant cases, as on today, the assessment orders have been quashed by the Tribunal, vide its order dated...

10. The Tribunal set aside the disallowance of short-term loss claimed by the assessee in the Profit and Loss Account, holding that the shares were acquired under a normal...

11. Grant of Interim Award - There was a fundamental failure of the first Arbitral Tribunal to address the plea raised by ONGC for attracting the group of companies doctrine....

12. In this case, the High Court addressed the issue of a rejected refund claim due to being time-barred. The key determination was the relevant date for calculating the...

13. CENVAT Credit - duty paying documents - The Appellant correctly availed the cenvat credit. Further, the department nowhere raised any dispute on the said records. Thus...

14. Non-speaking order - It is clear that the order of Tribunal is certainly a non-speaking order and the Tribunal failed to consider the grounds raised by the appellant....

15. The CESTAT New Delhi, an Appellate Tribunal, considered a request for restoration of an appeal dismissed for want of prosecution. The appellant had submitted an...