Here is Portfolio page of Ankur, with all his work

AO computed higher indirect cost that reduced benefits u/s 80HHC deleted by HC.
Nov. 04, 2015
Assessee-Co. traded & exported. It was entitled for deduction u/s 80HHC. AO computed higher indirect cost attributable to turnover by taking total indirect cost in ratio of export turnover & total turnover which reduced income benefit u/s 80HHC. CIT & ITAT allowed it. On appeal HC disallowed it holding that ITAT's decision allowed deduction in previous year. Thus, assessee held entitled to benefit of Rs.50 lacs & not Rs.30 lakhs u/s 80HHC(3)(b).-01…
Non obstante clause in Sec. 80-IA(5) overrides all proviso. held HC.
Dec. 08, 2015
Tribunal held, u/s 80-IA(5), while computing profits from eligible business for allowing deduct'n u/s 80-IB, deduct'n of losses set off against profits from other business was to be taken into considerat'n. On appeal HC held, non obstante clause in Sec. 80-IA(5) overrides all proviso. In absence of non obstante clause & because of non-obstante clause, set off amount against other income of assessee has to be ignored. Tribunal's order was upheld.-00…
There is Difference between accounting income & taxable income held SC.
Nov. 06, 2015
Appellant NPO in USA granted tax exempt. as edu. institute there. It has branch office in India. CBDT rejected its application u/s10(23C). On writ HC upheld order of CBDT. On appeal SC Held, diff. between accounting income & taxable income. u/s 10, it is accounting income. It is open to prescribed authority, if it deems fit, to stipulate that certain percentage of accounting income would be utilized for impartation of education in India.
AO held erroneous in invoking Sec. 43 for determining actual cost in deal.
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee acquired business of EMD at slump price. AO found, assessee enhanced value of assets as WDV of assets shown & disallowed excess depreciation. On appeal, CIT(A) held, there was no question of evading tax liability by assessee even if lower depreciation was granted. On appeal, ITAT upheld order of CIT(A). On appeal, HC upheld CIT(A) & ITAT decision stating that assessee had no income for it to reduce its tax liabilities by way of transfer.-0…
Assessee directed to show records on which change in accounting policy made.
Nov. 23, 2015
Assessee filed return declaring loss. Assessment completed u/s 143(3) &Sec.115JB. AO reopened assessment on ground of no change in accounting policy regarding dep. AO made addit'n to book profit on account of applying reduced rate of dep. CIT(A) upheld it. On appeal ITAT held, issue on merits is set aside to record of AO for deciding afresh after verification & examination of relevant record, which assessee has not produced before AO & Tribunal.-00…
Sum paid by Co. to lessor was not revenue exp. made for working cap. asset, SC
Nov. 14, 2015
Assessee Co. acquired from State Govt. lease of limestone quarries for manufacture of cement. In a/c year Co. paid its lessor as per two covenants & claimed to deduct sum in computation of its business profits u/s 10(2)(xv). AAC, ITO & Tribunal rejected it. On reference HC upheld it. SC upheld it too holding that sum agreed to be paid by Co. to lessor was not revenue exp. which was made by Co. for working capital asset which it had acquired.-010366
AO order of withdrawl of benefit of investment allowance held incorrect by HC.
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee was granted benefit of investment allowance u/s 32A. Under a scheme industrial units held by assessee were transferred to other companies. AO passed order u/s 32A(5) withdrawing benefit of investment allowance. On appeal CIT(A) allowed it. However, ITAT disallowed holding that scheme of arrangement did not result in 'transfer' u/s 32A(5). On appeal HC upheld ITAT decision holding that there was transfer within meaning of Section 32A(5). -0…
As assessees had insufficient cause, thus delay in filling case was not condoned
Dec. 11, 2015
In search, documents, a/c books & papers seized from office of assessees. AO issued notice u/s 153A for block assessm't proceedings. AO passed assessm't order by making addit'ns. CIT(A) & ITAT upheld AO's order. On appeal HC found, assessees have not shown sufficient cause for condoning delay. Parameters laid down by SC in in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur, Nafar Academy 2013 (5) CTC 547 delay held not to be condon…
Lifting of corporate veil by AO held in breach of principles of natural justice
Dec. 08, 2015
Tax dues were pending upon assessee, director of ltd Co. AO issued notice u/s 179 to recover outstanding dues. Assessee objected, as he was director of public ltd. Co. AO held that if conditions were satisfied for lifting of corporate veil, he could take public Ltd. Co. as pvt. ltd. Co. On writ, HC held, AO order based on lifting of corporate veil even if it is, would be in breach of principles of natural justice & hence, can't be sustained.&nb…
Section 66, 67(o) Finance Act held ultra vires to contitution, SC
Apr. 08, 2016
On writ HC held, Sec. 66, 67(o) of Finance Act, 1994 & other provisions related to Kalyana Mandapams & Mandap-Keepers to be intra vires of Constitution of India. On writ SC held, it has been a well established judicial principle that so long as legislation is in substance, on matter assigned to legislature enacting that statute, it must be held valid in its entirety even though it may trench upon matters beyond its competence.