sitemap   Home | Registration | Expert Exchange | Viewer's Forum | Currency Converter | Apply for News Correspondent  
 
 

Salient features of Finance Bill, 2008 by Ved Jain

Salaried Class IT Refund information by Income Tax Deptt

Budget 2008 snapshots by Naveen Gupta

 
   
 
News Search:
 
   
 
« From the Courts »
 The State cannot recover or hold back any tax except in accordance with law for otherwise it would be unjustly enriching itself, which is clearly impermissible.
 Penalty: Concealment of income - Bona fide belief, Rejection of assessee’s claim
 Computation of: undisclosed income - Income of the year below taxable limit
 Delhi Tribunal pronounced recently where the parity of treatment of employees contribution with that of the employers has been ruled
 Allocation of work - Representation of CIT(DRs) and Sr. DRs. before ITAT
 Law of precedent: Judicial discipline-Decision of non-jurisdiction High court
 Special Bench of ITAT rules on 16 Important Tax issues
 Registration of: Charitable trust - Limitation for: Passing order by CIT, Effect of: Non-passing of order within specified time
 SC: DTA will override the provisions of Income Tax Act
 Tata Hospital not liable to pay sales tax
 Punjab Govt appeal dismissed
 SC: Arbitration agreements must be adhered to by the parties
 Penalty:Concealment of income - Bona fide belief
 Appealable Order-Challenge to intimation under s.143(1) in appeal agent regular assessment under s.143(3)
 Limitation for: Re-assessment - Findings or directions in appellate order, Findings vs observations
 AO does not have the jurisdiction to go beyond the net profit as per Profit & Loss account except as provided in Explanation to Sec.115JA of Income Tax Act-AO has to levy the tax only on the book profit as per the Balance Sheet
 
 
 
 
 

Punjab Govt appeal dismissed
March, 21st 2008
The Supreme Court last week dismissed the appeal of the Punjab government against the judgment of the high court allowing sales tax deduction for Perfect Synthetics, manufacturers of yarn.
 
The company’s stand was that it bought raw materials from tax-exempted units within the state and used them in the manufacture of yarn. A majority of the yarn was sold intra-state and tax on finished goods was paid.
 
However, the department did not allow deduction in the taxable turnover on the ground that the goods bought by the company are liable to tax at the first stage of sale.
 
Since no tax on purchase of raw materials from exempted units has been paid, the company was not entitled to the deduction under Rule 29. The high court rejected the department’s view and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court.
 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2006 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.