Here is Portfolio page of Ak, with all his work

Opinion at time of certificate grant can't debar AO from initiating proceedings.
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee company worked on contract for PGCIL. AO reopened assessment. Assessee objected. AO rejected it on ground that authorization issued u/s 195/197 provisional in nature. HC held, no return had been filed. As per Sec.195 &197, clear that if any opinion expressed at time of grant of certificate, it is tentative or provisional or interim in nature would not debar AO from initiating proceeding u/s 147 due to change of opinion. -010551
Additions made by AO on ground of unexplained investment upheld by HC.
Dec. 11, 2015
Assessee purchased plot for consideration of Rs. 3.70 lakhs. After survey u/s 133A, filed a revised return, declaring sale considerat'n at Rs. 38 lakhs. AO opined that there was unexplained investment of Rs. 34.30 lakhs on part of assessee & made addit'n in light of facts. CIT(A) & ITAT upheld it on appeal. On appeal HC held, assessee was unable to refer to any contradict'n in statements of his vendors or any evidence to rebut material on r…
Definition of "Manufacture" (for Excise purposes) is different for jewellers
Apr. 19, 2016
Generally, for Excise purposes, manufacture means "a process in which original goods are transformed into some other goods which are distinctly known in commercial market". However, this definition is not complete when we think of jewellery manufacturing. In case of jewellery,"branding" of jewellery is considered as manufacturing. So, if a jewellery trader purchases a necklace & puts "his name" on it then he would be called as a manufacturer.
Departmental authorities Jurisdiction had to be founded on Sec. 34 of I.T.Act.
Oct. 30, 2015
Amount assessed as foreign income. Invoking of Sec.34 was denied. On appeal Tribunal held, until war was over, no information to ITO, if business was running & if any income had been earned at all abroad but termination of war & information about existence of foreign business, constituted definite information which justified taking of Sec. 34. On appeal HC upheld it stating that Sec. 34 was validly applied for relevant assessment year.
Profits in absence of evidenced, must be regarded as remittances of profits. SC
Oct. 30, 2015
ITO held profit assessable to tax u/s 4(I)(b)(iii) as income profits & gains accrued to appellant without British India before beginning of previous year & received in British India during relevant accounting year & then assessed. On appeal Tribunal upheld it stating, profits in absence of any evidenced adduced by appellant to contrary, must be regarded as remittances of profits. HC dismissed application u/s 66(2). SC on appeal upheld it.-010403
Element of discrimination in refusing benefits to assessee by AO, held HC.
Nov. 02, 2015
u/s 144/147 &10(26AAA), AO held assessee non-Sikkimese & denied benefit in tax. On writ HC held, element of discrimination in refusing benefits ,merely because assessment proceedings had already been initiated & best orders were passed for assessment years, overlooking clarification that same is applicable even in case of reassessment. Settled law that benevolent circulars providing administrative relief to assessee have to be given effect.-010552
Income addit'n by AO required fresh considerat'n, thus matter remanded to AO.
Dec. 24, 2015
Assessee-Co. was running stock ex. It was collecting listing fee from Co's listed in its stock ex. at prescribed rate. Assessee followed mercantile system of accounting. On appeal CIT(A) deleted addit'ns. On appeal ITAT held, In absence of explanations of assessee as to how element of uncertainty exists in respect of listing fee receivable from each of Co., not possible to adjudicate this issue. Thus, issue required fresh examinat'n at end of AO.-0…
Assessees claim of 25% Depreciation was rejected on ground of wrong valuation.
Oct. 30, 2015
Assessee claimed 25% depreciation on intangible assets. AO accepted it. Survey u/s 133A was carried out on assessee. Certificate issued by valuer was only for internal use of company & could not be used for claiming depreciation. AO issued notice u/s 148. On writ HC held that notices have not been issued on basis of change of opinion but on basis of fresh tangible material obtained during survey. Thus AO was correct in issuing notices.-000278
Amount invested by assessee in bonds, entitled it to benefits u/s 54E, HC.
Nov. 02, 2015
As income had accrued to assessee-company u/h of Long-term capital gain on transfer of asset in respect of its two units, it was taxed by AO. On appeal tribunal upheld it. On appeal HC held, as assessee had made relevant disclosure in return for relevant assessment year when enhanced compensation was received transfer took place. Amount invested by assessee in bonds, which entitled it to certain benefits u/s 54E. Notice u/s 148 quashed.-010549

Here is business page of Ak, with all his work

About Portfolio

My dear ,

My dear ,

Do you want to subscribe ? I would give you a free coupon to help you start calling.

Ok , no issues, if you have a question then you can try the search feature at quaremon.

Hi Thakurani,
I want to deposit in my account
Thanks,

Here is business page of Ak, with all his work

About Portfolio

My dear ,

My dear ,

Do you want to subscribe ? I would give you a free coupon to help you start calling.

Ok , no issues, if you have a question then you can try the search feature at quaremon.

Hi Thakurani,I want to deposit in my accountThanks,

Hi Thakurani,
I want to deposit in my account
Thanks,