Here is Portfolio page of Rajeev, with all his work

Entire Mobilization on oil & gas exploration services held taxable by HC.
Nov. 02, 2015
On Q., If mobilization revenues taxable in India limited only to revenues attributable to distance traveled in Indian territorial waters as compared to total distance travelled from India. HC held, if part of income falls under royalties/fees for technical services, no scope to assess receipts under these heads, once it is held that income is from its oil exploration & production activities as envisaged u/s 44BB. Entire mobilization taxable.-01…
Evasion of summons is independent offence u/s 56 & 40 of FERA, SC.
Nov. 06, 2015
HC rejected appeal against framing of composite charge u/s 219 of CrPC. On appeal SC held, after adjudicating officer chose to drop proceedings against appellant, does not absolve appellant of criminal liability incurred by him by virtue of operation of Sec.40 & 56. Offence u/s 56 & 40 is independent offence. Exonerating accused, who successfully evades process of law would be destructive of law & order, apart from being against public …
Assessee was under bona fide belief of not liable for tax audit, penalty deleted
Jan. 13, 2016
Assessee was Govt. appointed licensed vendor for sale of stamps. AO held, total value of stamps was assessee's turnover & he was liable for audit u/s 44AB. On non-compliance AO levied penalty u/s 271B. On appeal, CIT(A) held AO justified in levying penalty. On appeal ITAT held, Govt. retained over all control over stamps, assessee was under bona fide belief of being not liable for audit of a/c u/s 44AB, thus, penalty imposed u/s 271B was deleted.
HC has no jurisdiction in penalty imposition case, if on cogent reasons by ITAT.
Nov. 02, 2015
Penalty was imposed on non production of books of accounts. On appeal HC dismissed the appeal holding that where appellant challenged sufficiency of evidence only & there is some material, justifying order once passed by Tribunal, HC not to interfere in matter where penalty has been imposed legally on basis of cogent reasons. In this case question of law is not involved but the appellant challenged the sufficiency of evidence only.-010553
CIT held right in annulling order of successor AO as was overruling previous AO.
Nov. 03, 2015
On notice of fact that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It was re-opened u/s 147 & AO passed order u/s 143(3). On appeal CIT held against AO. On appeal ITAT allowed order passed by AO. On appeal HC held that by invocation of Sec.147, successor AO sat over decision of earlier AO order passed u/s 143(3) with respect to issues sought to be covered under section 147. Thus, CIT was justified in anulling order of successor AO.-000300
Assessee must calculate Tax on basis of net profits without deduction of EPT. SC
Nov. 02, 2015
EPTO held, applying rule 12 of 1st Schedule of EPT Act, that not necessary for assessee for purpose of its business to make calculations on basis of net profits without deduction of excess profits tax. On appeal Tribunal & HC upheld it. On appeal SC held, Tribunal in affirming finding had further material to act upon. HC decision was correct. Unnecessary, in view of fact to consider that action of EPTOwas referable to rule under which he acted. -0…
As tenancy belonged to individual partners, asseessee can't be taxed on rent.
Nov. 03, 2015
Assessee ran business of rental premises. AO after survey found an agreement indicating surrender of tenancy by assessee-firm in favour of builder. AO taxed rent. On appeal CIT(A) & ITAT deleted tax on ground that tenancy of rental premises belonged to individual partners & not to assessee. Also, it was tripartite agreement & rent was normal allowable business expenditure of Assessee's firm. On appeal HC upheld both CIT(A) & ITAT findings.-000286
Interest received as part of sale consideration held "capital gain" by HC.
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee company was under liquidation. Mill belonging to assessee-company sold in public auction. AO assessed amount of interest as income under head 'Income from other sources'. Liquidator under capital gains. On writ HC held, interest received was part of sale consideration & therefore, same could not be treated as income from other sources under Sec. 56. Said amount should be treated only as capital gain u/s 45 for purpose of assessment.-010554
Applicant held not liable to tax in India in view of DTAA between India & USA.
Nov. 02, 2015
Discounted margin described as income by way of interest within meaning of Sec. 2(28A) & Sec. 9(1)(v) by AO. On appeal AAR held, discounting of bill of exchange or promissory note being a purchase of instrument as it were & especially when it is discounted without recourse, it has to be held that applicant is not liable to tax in India in view of DTAA between India & USA. Applicant will not be subject to withholding of tax u/s 195 of I.T.Act.-010557

Here is business page of Rajeev, 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 Rajeev, 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,