Here is Portfolio page of Ak, with all his work

For taxing Govt. subsidy from public funds to note if same is capital or revenue
Nov. 02, 2015
AO held ,subsidies from State Govt., either already received or receivable, had to be accounted for as per mercantile system & were taxable. CIT & Tribunal upheld it. On appeal HC held, subsidy from Govt. would be taxable, if it can be used for any purpose by assessee likes including its trade & business & would then be in nature of trade receipts & taxable. To be seen , Subsidy from payment from public funds is capital or revenue for taxing it.-01…
Selling in brand name held no bar to claim benefit by manufacturing activity.
Nov. 03, 2015
Assessee manufactured electronic goods & claimed deduction u/s 80-IC. AO disallowed it, as only brand name of parent company was traded & manufacturing activities were inadequate. Thus, LCD monitor claimed to be manufactured by assessee was not covered under Schedule XIV. On appeal ITAT & HC allowed deduction holding that selling product in brand name was no bar to claim benefit on account of manufacturing activity of assembling components. -000297
Premises of Sequoia Capital have been searched by Enforcement department of FEMA
Apr. 20, 2016
Sequoia Capital is a minority share holder in Vasan Eye care, a Chennai based healthcare group. The enforcement department (ED) of FEMA is already probing Vasan for alleged FEMA violations. This has necessitated ED to look into Sequoia Capital too. Sequoia which calls itself "a startup building partner to founders in India who want to turn business ideas into enduring companies" has confirmed the action and is cooperating in all respects.
Assessee's deduct'n claim u/s 10A of I.T.Act allowed by ITAT after denial by AO.
Dec. 24, 2015
Assessee developed & traded software & hardwares. In return declared total loss. TPO passed order u/s 92CA(3) without making any adjustm't. AO denied assessee's claim of deduct'n u/s 10A of Act. However, CIT(A) allowed it on appeal. On appeal HC upheld it holding that, assessee's claim for deduc'n could not be denied unless claim was withdrawn right from initial assessm't year. A.O was directed to recompute the book profit u/s115JB of I.T. …
Commissioner is to perform quasi-judicial functions to decide allegations, HC.
Nov. 02, 2015
AO passed assessment order u/s 158BC on undisclosed income. Assessee filed application before Settlement Commission. It passed order accepting amount offered by assessee as undisclosed income. Show cause notice issued by commissioner. On writ HC held, it was Commissioner who was ultimately to perform quasi-judicial functions as per provisio. to decide about correctness or otherwise of allegations made by him. Show cause notice rightly issued.-010548
SEZ covered by Sec. 115JB(6) irrespective of claiming deduction u/s 10A I.T.Act.
Dec. 10, 2015
Assessee mfd. gold jewellery. It claimed deduct'n u/s 10A of I.T. Act against income generated out of unit located in SEEPZ. AO, held said deduct'n should be granted against total income available after setting off of brought forward losses & dep & determined book profit u/s 115JB of I.T.Act. CIT(A) upheld it. On appeal ITAT held, unit in SEZ will be covered by Sec. 115JB(6) irrespective of fact that those units were claiming deduction u/s …
Demand of stay on AO order rejecetd as no reasonable grounds are made out, HC
Dec. 11, 2015
AO made addit'n to assessee's income on account of adjustm't on ALP, disallowance of loss on sale of assets etc. Also, levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. AO granted partial stay on demand by assessee. On writ, HC held, no reasonable grounds made out to direct respondents to grant stay in respect of entire disputed outstanding demand or to grant injunct'n from taking coercive action in recovering demand.
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…
In TP case, PLI held to be favourable in comparison to average comparable.
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee ran business of designing packaged software & consultancy services. Ref. made to TPO, for determining arms length pricing u/s 92CA(3) in respect of international transaction entered into by assessee was accepted by AO. On appeal ITAT set aside AO decision holding, amount received from associates was reimbursement of payment of incentive & inextricably linked with corresponding expenses. PLI favourable as compared to average comparables.-0…
If done after banking hrs, bid amount can be deposited on next day of auction.
Nov. 05, 2015
On non payment of Loan amount. Bank auctioned mortgaged property of company. Petition was filed for setting aside sale. HC held, officer authorized by bank, which was conducting auction proceedings, had no option but to call upon second respondent to deposit 25 per cent of bid amount by next day. Such deposit has to be treated as deposit made immediately after bid of second respondent had been declared successful. Hence, petition was dismisse…