Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: VAT RATES :: due date for vat payment :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: form 3cd :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: empanelment :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: cpt :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: TDS :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: VAT Audit
 
 
From the Courts »
 The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 Vs. Inter Globe Technology Quotient Pvt. Ltd.
 Akum Drugs And Pharmaceuticals Limited Through: Director Shri. Sanjeev Jain Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1) & Anr.
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-2 New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. M/s Ferns „n? Petals
 Prabhatam Investment Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
 CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt.Ltd (Delhi High Court)
  State Of Jharkhand vs. Lalu Prasad Yadav (Supreme Court)
 CIT vs. Krishan K. Aggarwal (Supreme Court)
 Ambuja Cements Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Service Tax Commissionerate, Delhi
 Director Of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Vishwa Hindu Parishad
 ITAT Proposes Important Changes To Tribunal Rules
 Meherjee Cassinath Holdings Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The issue of notice under s. 143 (2) is mandatory for block assessment proceedings
December, 05th 2007
ACIT vs. Aurangabad Holiday Resorts (ITAT Pune)

(i) The issue of notice under s. 143 (2) is mandatory for block assessment proceedings. If notice u/s 143 (2) is not issued, the assessment order passed u/s 158BC is not valid.
(ii) Where there is a conflict between the Special Bench of the ITAT and a non-jurisdictional High Court, the High Court decision has to be followed. Godavari Devi Saraf 119 ITR 589 (Bom) reconciled with Thana Electricity 206 ITR 727 (Bom) and followed.
(iii) Where the appeal is decided on a preliminary issue, not necessary to decide the other issues in the appeal.

Note: The Tribunal followed the decision of the Gauhati High Court in Bandana Gogoi vs. CIT 289 ITR 28 (Gau) instead of the ITAT Lucknow Special Bench in Naval Kishore vs. DCIT 87 ITD 407.

See also:Atul Glass Industries vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi), Vin Vish Corporation vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) & Tulika Mishra vs. JCIT (ITAT Delhi).
 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Software Development Software Programming Software Engineering Custom Software Development Requirement Based Software Development Software Solutions Software Serv

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions