Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 33 (0.31 seconds)Commr.Of Income Tax-I,Ahmedabad vs Gold Coin Health Food Pvt.Ltd on 18 August, 2008
8. The AR in rejoinder submitted the case law relied on by
the learned DR viz., CIT Vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd.,
(supra) is distinguishable on facts.
Section 36 in THE FINANCE ACT, 2021 [Entire Act]
Section 36 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 139 in THE FINANCE ACT, 2021 [Entire Act]
Commr.Of Income Tax-I,New Delhi vs Vatika Township P.Ltd on 15 September, 2014
reason that Parliament clarified the position of law by
changing the expression `any' by `if any' which was not a
substantive amendment creating penalty for the first time.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court followed the judgment in the case
of CIT v. Vatika Township P. Ltd. (supra) and held that Rule 8D
of the I.T.Rules does not apply retrospectively.
Section 43B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Dy.Cit., Circle-4,, Ahmedabad vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. , ... on 28 April, 2017
9.5 The learned Standing Counsel had submitted that the
A.O. may be directed to follow the outcome of the judgment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP filed by the assessee against
the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of
CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (supra). This
plea of the Standing Counsel is devoid of any merit.
Google India Private Limited, ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 11 May, 2018
Ltd.
v. DCIT (supra) the assessee would have been entitled to
deduction of employees' contribution to ESI, if the payment was
made prior to due date of filing of the return of income u/s
139(1) of the I.T.Act. Therefore, the amendment brought about
by the Finance Act, 2021 to section 36[1][va] and 43B of the
I.T.Act, alters the position of law adversely to the assessee.
Therefore, such amendment cannot be held to be retrospective
in nature. Even otherwise, the amendment has been mentioned
to be effective from 01.04.2021 and will apply for and from
assessment year 2021-2022 onwards. The following orders of
the Tribunal had categorically held that the amendment
7 ITA No.503/Bang/2021
M/s.Anusha Techno Ventures.