Tally for CAs in Industry Silver Edition (Single User) Tally Renewal (Auditor Edition) Need Tally for Clients? (Tie-up with us!!!)
From the Courts »
 Rajesh Kumar Prop, N. W. Overseas, 42,Devi Murti Coloy, Panipat Vs. ACIT, Panipat Circle, Haryana
 Shri Madhukar Arenja, 702, Odyssey-II, Hiranandini Garden, Powai, Mumbai Vs. The ACIT, Circle 47(1), Room No.107, Drumshape Building, New Delhi.
 M/s Creative Ideas, B 304, New Friends Colony, New Delhi Vs. ITO, Ward 28(4), New Delhi
 Khazan Singh Anand, Kothi No. 2, GF Kailash Enclave, Pitampura, New Delhi Vs. ITO, Ward 40(5), New Delhi
 M/s GAIL (INDIA) LTD 16, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE NEW DELHI Vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE 12 C.R. BUILDING, NEW DELHI
 Total Integrated Design (India) Pvt. Ltd. LG F7A, Mandakini NRI Complex, Greater Kailash IV, New Dlehi. Vs. ITO Ward 25(3) C.R. Building, New Delhi.
 Sayar Devi Baid, 1/1942A, Moti Ram Road, Shahdra, New Delhi Vs. ITO Ward 56 (3) New Delhi.
 SNW Smith Consultants Pvt. Ltd, 8 th Floor, Commercial Tower, Hotel Le Meredien, Janpath, New Delhi Vs. ACIT, Central Circle 5, New Delhi
 Shri Sanjeev Gupta, City Hospital and Maternity Home, Nursing Home Site 2, Opp. Sagar Cinema, Sector 16, Faridabad, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Faridabad.
 Orange Business Services India Solutions Pvt. Ltd, (earlier known as Equant Solutions India Pvt. Ltd) Vs. DCIT, Circle-3, Gurgaon
 Ved Parkash Bharti, S/o. Shri Parmanand, H. No. 1049-50, Sector-13-17, HUDA, Panipat Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Karnal

ICAI-ASB seeking views of Practicing Chartered Accountants on Questionnaire on application of Accounting Standards by Micro and Small Non-Corporate Entities by August 10, 2020.
July, 21st 2020

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the criminal proceedings initiated by the IT authorities against former Karnataka minister and state Congress President D K Shivakumar for alleged recovery of undisclosed wealth following a raid conducted at his premises in 2017.

In his plea, the petitioner, D K Shivakumar challenged the validity of the Karnataka High Court’s order of November 2019, declining to give him relief. The HC had then dismissed his criminal revision petition against the order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, rejecting his plea for discharge in a complaint filed by deputy director, Income Tax investigation for having committed an offense under the tax laws and provisions of the Indian Penal Code.



Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for Mr. Shivakumar, objected to the proceedings against his client and sought a stay and contended that no complaint (of undisclosed wealth) can be filed by the income tax authorities on the basis of a raid in which time has not been given to file the returns for the year.

The attention of the court was drawn on the ‘Clarificatory Circular No. 24 of 2019’ issued by CBDT, wherein it was laid down that prosecution may be initiated only when a penalty for concealment has been imposed and that the penalty has been upheld by the Appellate Tribunal.



A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices R Subhash Reddy and A S Bopanna issued notice to the Income Tax department but refused to issue a stay on a special leave petition filed by Shivakumar. The court sought a response from the Income Tax authorities within four weeks.


Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2020 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting