Shocksnmocks image
News Topics
Thakurani
A9 Top Floor C Block Community Center, Naraina Vihar
New Delhi, Delhi 110028
Facebook
Twitter
Google+

View and comment on the tax updates on a single page

Do you think that the tax news in simple language are better? Can you write them in simple language? and then broadcast? Then Write them at shocks n mocks.

Shocksnmocks image
  • Court allows interim stay on tax assessment notices amid settlement law changes

    Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021

    This case involves Blossom Gold Collection P. Ltd. challenging the refusal of an interim stay on tax assessment notices after a change in the law removed their right to settle tax disputes through the Income Tax Settlement Commission. The High Court modified the earlier order, granting an interim stay on the assessment notices while clarifying that the authorities could still process the company’s application for settlement under the old law, pendi…

    0 Upvote   | 0 Comments
  • Court Rules Notices Issued to Deceased Taxpayers Are Invalid and Unenforceable

    Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021

    In the case of Late Bhupendra Bhikhalal Desai (Since Deceased) Through Legal Heir Raju Bhupendra Desai vs. Income Tax Officer & Anr., the court determined that notices issued under tax laws to a deceased individual are legally unenforceable. The court quashed the notices and reaffirmed that tax proceedings cannot continue against a deceased person without proper notification to their legal heirs.

    0 Upvote   | 1 Comments
  • Court affirms Assessing Officer’s authority to reopen tax assessments based on …

    Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021

    In the case of Navnidhi Dyeing and Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Director of Mayank Mahesh Kumar Malpani Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, the court addressed whether the Assessing Officer (AO) had the jurisdiction to reopen a tax assessment after new information suggested that the income had escaped assessment due to undisclosed facts. The court ruled in favor of the AO, allowing the reopening of the assessment based on credible new eviden…

    0 Upvote   | 1 Comments
  • Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021

    This case involves Chetan Engineers challenging the reopening of their income tax assessment for the year 2012-13. The main issue was whether the Assessing Officer (AO) properly considered the objections raised by the assessee (Chetan Engineers) before proceeding with the reassessment. The High Court found that the AO did not adequately address these objections and ordered the AO to reconsider them and pass a fresh, reasoned order.

    0 Upvote   | 0 Comments
  • Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021

    In this case, a Joint Venture Company involving three Korean multinationals faced scrutiny over its transfer pricing methods. The court upheld the Transfer Pricing Officer’s (TPO) authority to make adjustments, rejecting the assessee’s claims that the TPO acted without jurisdiction. The judgment emphasized the importance of compliance and cooperation during tax assessments.

    0 Upvote   | 1 Comments

Reassessment Notice Quashed: AO Failed to Apply Mind, Mixed Up Assessment Years

This case involves Bharatkumar Nihalchand Shah challenging a reassessment notice issued by the Income Tax Department for the assessment year 2011-12. The High Court found that the Assessing Officer (AO) had not properly formed an independent opinion and had mixed up facts from different assessment years. As a result, the court quashed the reassessment notice, ruling in favor of the taxpayer.

Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021
0 Upvote|   1 Comments
  • Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021

    This case involves a dispute between the tax authorities (Revenue) and a taxpayer (the assessee) over whether losses from foreign currency fluctuations can be claimed as a business loss. The Revenue challenged the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s (ITAT) decision in favor of the assessee, arguing that such losses are not allowable. The High Court, however, sided with the assessee, confirming that these losses are deductible, provided certain conditio…

    0 Upvote   | 1 Comments
  • Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021

    This case involves the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Taneja Developers and Infrastructure Ltd. The main issue was whether a penalty could be imposed on the company for making a new claim in its tax return, based on a change in accounting policy, which was later disallowed. The court held that since all facts were disclosed and there was no concealment or inaccurate particulars, penalty proceedings were not justified.

    0 Upvote   | 1 Comments
Income Tax,Jun. 11, 2021

This case involves Miele India Pvt. Ltd. and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. The main dispute was whether certain pre-operative and advertising expenses should be allowed as business deductions or treated as capital expenses (which are not immediately deductible). The court ultimately sided with the taxpayer, holding that these expenses were legitimate business expenditures and should be allowed as deductions.

0 Upvote   | 1 Comments

Court rules that prosecution for tax evasion cannot proceed without determining…

In this case, the Income Tax Department filed complaints against D.K. Shivakumar for alleged tax evasion. The court found that the prosecution was premature because it was not established whether the unaccounted transactions were liable for tax, penalty, or interest. Consequently, the court discharged the accused and allowed the Income Tax Department to file fresh complaints after determining the tax liability.

Income Tax,Jun. 10, 2021
0 Upvote|   1 Comments
Loading...
Ask a Question Create a Ripple(News)