Category: Judgments

Courts power confined to examine arbitration agreement existence only after amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996-Delhi High Court

Courts power confined to examine arbitration agreement existence only after amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996-Delhi High Court.  ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 1039 (2016) (10) HC Important Case Law Referred: Radhakrishnan v. M/s. Maestro Engineers & Ors. (2009) (13) SCALE 403 Brief Facts of the Case: …

Polished granite slab used on floor is not tile under Karnataka Sales Tax Act Entry8. There is distinction between polished granite stone/slabs and tiles-SC

Polished granite slab used on floor is not tile under Karnataka Sales Tax Act Entry 8. that there is a distinction between polished granite stone or slabs and tiles-Supreme Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 1038 (2016) (10) SC Important Case Law Referred: M/s. Vishwakarma Granites v. Commissioner of …

Rakhi Sawant income tax appeals gets both relief and dismissal-Dismissal for delay, disallowance us 40(a)(ia) remanded assessee being not covered u/s 44AB

Rakhi Sawant income tax appeals gets both relief and dismissal from ITAT-dismissal for delay, disallowance us 40(a)(ia) remanded assessee being not covered u/s 44AB ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 1037 (2016) (10) ITAT Appeal-1 dismissed for dealy There was a delay of 704 days for filing the appeal. The …

Partnership salary allowed in profit loss ratio as per deed as the remuneration clause provided the manner of quantifying as per CBDT Circular No. 739

Partnership salary allowed in profit loss ratio as per deed. Remuneration clause provided the manner of quantifying as per CBDT Circular No. 739 – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Ctation 1035 (2016)(10) ITAT Important Judgments Cited: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. DCS International Trading Durga Dass Davki …

No Penalty 271(1)(c) even if quantum proceedings upheld additions. Merely because a bona fide explanation did not find favour, penalty not justified

No Penalty 271(1)(c) even if quantum proceedings upheld additions. Merely because a bona fide explanation did not find favour, it would not justify the levy of concealment penalty-ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 1034 (2016) (10) ITAT Brief Facts of the Case: A search operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, …