Here is Portfolio page of Shrayan, with all his work

what is the procedure to appoint additional director in a company ?

It required lot of legal document. for that contact me.
What is the difference between TDS and income tax?
Feb. 06, 2017
Revision petition allowed as no material against the petitioner accused
Aug. 12, 2016
Petitioner, a chit fund company, induced the respondent to invest with the petitioner. Despite requests for release of matured chit amount, it was not released and respondent filed a complaint u/s 200 & 156 (3) Cr. P. C. before the Ld. Magistrate, and an FIR was registered. Petitioner filed a revision before the Special Judge who held that there was no material to proceed against petitioner and allowed the revision petition. -500080
Depreciation could be claimed @ of 25% on intangible assets acquired, ITAT
Dec. 11, 2015
Assessee traded in two wheeler brake systems & components. It acquired intangible assets. It claimed, depreciation on intangible assets @ 25%. AO & DRP disallowed it. On appeal ITAT allowed the depreciation. ITAT held, in case of intangible assets (being commercial/business rights) diminution in value or physical wear & tear is not essential condition for admissibility for dep. u/s 32, if they were used as business tool for earning in...
Set-off claim allowed on ground of non consideration of mandatory fact by AO, HC
Nov. 06, 2015
Assessee manufactured scooter & two wheeler rims. In return, assessee claimed set off of brought forward investment allowance. AO disallowed it. CIT allowed it as per amendment to Sec.32A & CBDT Circular No. 572. On appeal HC upheld CIT & ITAT decision stating that as on date of claiming benefit of investment allowance, sufficient reserve had already been created. Thus, AO has not considered said fact which is mandatory under CBDT circular. -010599
Claim to be considered trading loss decided with ref.to Apex Court decisions, HC
Nov. 04, 2015
Assessee manufactured & sold fire works. AO disallowed claim of disputed debts due from debtors & sum towards time barred debts. He made additions. CIT & ITAT rejected assesse's claim. On appeal HC set aside ITAT's order & directed it to consider assessee's claim of sum of Rs. 4,75,307/- as to whether said can be considered as trading loss in light of decisions of Apex Court: Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT.[1997] 225 ITR 802.-010597
Sec. 5(7A) is ultra vires Art.14 of Consti. & so is Sec. 64(5)(b) held SC.
Nov. 14, 2015
Petitioner-firm carried business as manufacturer & seller of bidi. Petitioner was informed by ITO, that in pursuance of order u/s 5(7A), his assessment records were transferred from Calcutta Office to Ranchi. ITO, Ranchi, called upon petitioner to submit his return for relevant assessment year. On writ HC held, Sec. 5(7A) is ultra vires article 14 of Consti. & so is Sec. 64(5)(b ) in so far as it makes an order u/s 5(7A) inviolate.-010398
High Court appointed an arbitrator where valid arbitration clause existed
Aug. 15, 2016
Petitioner insured its factory with respondent under Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy. Following a fire in the premises petitioner lodged a claim with respondent, who appointed a surveyor. Petitioner invoked the arbitration clause of the policy for the balance claim amount, and filed a petition u/s 11(6) for appointment of an arbitrator. The High Court allowed the petition and appointed an arbitrator. -500106
High Court allowed writ directing reconsideration of petitioner's termination
Aug. 14, 2016
Respondent cancelled petitioner's tender for supply of food grains in Gurgaon and Pataudi, on complaints that food grains had not been supplied in Gurgaon, and forfeited security amount for 2015-16 and blacklisted petitioner for future contracts. Petitioner filed a writ petition, and the High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the DM to take fresh decision on petitioners termination. -500084
Exempt. u/s 10B allowed as product'n of raw honey held manufacturing in nature.
Dec. 08, 2015
Assessee mfd. raw honey exported it. In return it claimed exempt. u/s 10B. AO allowed it. Commissioner held, assessee removed moisture from raw honey & repacked it, which is not manufacturing activities. Thus, set aside assessm't. On appeal ITAT held AO correct, as process carried on by assessee reflected steps undertaken by it to bring into existence finished product distinct from raw honey which is collected by beekeepers from bee-hives.