Here is Portfolio page of Shrayan, with all his work

Mall

Tools
Find Expert
Mobile App
Help
GST2
My Diary
Diary Shared With Me
Make money by giving answers
Ripples not for everyone
Work at times when you like
Marginalia on Sale
Diary on Sale
Simple Videos on complicated business maters
Earn
Start Earning
Shows all items that can make you money

Smart Score

1261

Dashboard

Quaremon

Shocks n Mocks

Job Harbor

Job

For Sale

Ripples

Yearwise

2016
2017

Premium

High Court partially allowed appeal and ordered back wages @25%
Aug. 12, 2016
The respondent/workman was employed with DTC as a driver, and raised an industrial dispute alleging termination. On his claim, the management advised him light duty, but subsequently he was not allowed to do so and he sought reinstatement. Labour held that termination was bad as no approval was taken u/s 33(2)(b). High Court partially allowing the appeal allowed back wages @ 25%.-500098
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
In a dishonour of cheque case, accused acquitted as he was not liable to pay
Aug. 16, 2016
accused approached the complainant company for using the services for displaying his painting in an exhibition, and issued cheques towards professional charges, which were dishonoured. Complainant filed a case u/s 138. The Court held that complainant failed to prove basic ingredients of Section 138, and the accused successfully raised probable defence that he is not liable to pay as complainant did not return his laptop and paintings.
Jurisdiction transfer was set aside by HC being in violation of Sec. 127(2).
Nov. 02, 2015
Assessee filed writ petition contending that jurisdiction in its case was transferred from one place to another without service of show-cause notice, same being violation of Sec.127(2). HC held that impugned order revealed that it does not refer to any contention raised on behalf of the assessee, thereby clearly proving that assessee was not afforded any opportunity of hearing. Thus, impugned order was contrary to Sec.127 & same was set aside. -0...
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
What is the difference between TDS and income tax?
Feb. 06, 2017
Delay in filling of SLP relating to Transfer pricing issue condoned by SC.
Nov. 06, 2015
HC on finding that (TPO) had proposed to make adjustment in arms length price without giving opportunity of personal hearing to assessee, remitted matter back to TPO for giving opportunity of hearing to assessee. On SLP SC condoned delay & held, as HC has remitted matter to TPO from whose order appeal is pending before CIT(A), it would be in interest of both sides to resort to Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism suggested in Budget of 2009.-0...
Illiterate tax payers should be dealt more sympathetically by Income Tax Dept.SC
Nov. 09, 2015
Assessee in return showed income. Agri. ITO under circumstances assessee directed to submit fresh return & to produce account books & filure would lead to assessment u/s 25(5) of Act. On non appearance ITO assessed income. On appeal SC held, Ignorant & illiterate people who are not, well versed with law of income-tax should be dealt with more sympathetically than was done here. They should not be penalised in manner that assesses was penalised.-0...
HC denied writ jurisdict'n as grievances of petit'nr factual & not perverse.
Dec. 11, 2015
Petitioner applied to CBDT for approval of its Industrial Park u/s 80-IA of I.T. Act. CBDT had denied approval u/s 80-IA of Income Tax Act. On writ, HC held, In view of conduct of petitioner in putting before Authority figures which when confronted with were substituted with new figures. Also, grievances of petitioner being factual which are not shown in any manner to be perverse/ arbitrary, would not warrant exercise of writ jurisd...

Hi there!

Would you like to receive a free callback in

Yes

×