Eminent Jurist Fali Nariman Warns That Boycott Of Collegium By Senior Judge Will Weaken The Supreme Court + Imp Verdicts
Riken Shah & co
Eminent Jurist Fali Nariman Warns That Boycott Of Collegium By Senior Judge Will Weaken The Supreme Court
Justice Jasti Chelameswar, a senior judge of the Supreme Court, has announced that he is boycotting the proceedings of the Collegium, an august body which has been set up by the Supreme Court to appoint new judges to the High Courts. This unprecedented step by a senior judge has sent shock waves across the Country
CBDT Reacts To High Court Strictures And Revises Guidelines For Appointment Of, And Fees Payable To, Standing Counsel
The CBDT has issued Instruction Nos.6 and 7 of 2016, both dated 7th September 2016, by which it has revised the guidelines for engagement of standing counsels to represent the income-tax department before the High Courts and other judicial forums. The CBDT has also revised the schedule of fees payable to the Counsel
Babita Lila vs. UOI (Supreme Court)
Prosecution: Important law relating to the territorial jurisdiction and competence of the Deputy Director of Income-tax to lodge a complaint for evasion of tax explained
The Parliament has unmistakably designated the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) to be the appellate forum from the orders as enumerated under Section 246(1) of the Act. This however, in our view, as observed hereinabove does not detract from the recognition of this authority to be the appellate forum before whom appeals from the decisions of an assessing officer or of an officer of the same rank thereto would generally and ordinarily lie even in the contingencies not referred to in particular in sub section 1 of Section 246. This is more so, to reiterate, in absence of any provision under the Act envisaging the Deputy Director of Income Tax to be an appellate forum in any eventuality beyond those contemplated in Section 246(1) of the Act. Neither the hierarchy of the income tax authorities as listed in Section 116 of the Act nor in the notification issued under Section 118 thereof, nor their duties, functions, jurisdictions as prescribed by the cognate provisions alluded heretobefore, permit a deduction that in the scheme of the legislation, the Deputy Director of Income Tax has been conceived also to be an appellate forum to which appeals from the orders/decisions of the I.T.Os./assessing officers would ordinarily lie within the meaning of Section 195(4) of the Code. The Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation)-I Bhopal, (M.P.), in our unhesitant opinion, therefore cannot be construed to be an authority to whom appeal would ordinarily lie from the decisions/orders of the I.T.Os. involved in the search proceedings in the case in hand so as to empower him to lodge the complaint in view of the restrictive preconditions imposed by Section 195 of the Code. The complaint filed by the Deputy Director of Income Tax, (Investigation)-I, Bhopal (M.P.), thus on an overall analysis of the facts of the case and the law involved has to be held as incompetent
Nimesh N. Kampani vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
S. 37(1): Expenditure incurred by a director in engaging lawyers to defend himself against cases filed for violation of the law by the Company of which he is a director is not personal expenditure but is allowable as business expenditure
Mr. Nimesh Kampani has been mentioned as one of the accused among several others, for non-payment of these fixed deposits by Nagarjuna Finance Limited. The Andhra Pradesh Government had since filed suit against directors of Nagarjuna Finance Limited including Mr. Kampani. To defend himself, Mr. Kampani has appointed various advocates to represent his case before various courts viz, District Court, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Supreme Court of India. As the expenditure is incurred to protect his business interest the same is required to be allowed u/s. 37(1) of the Act. Accordingly we direct the A.O. to allow legal expenses of Rs.40,72,750/-
M. G. Contractors Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
As per CBDT Instruction No. 9/2013 dated 22.07.2013, appeals against imposition of penalty or levy of interest in which the aggregate of penalty imposed or interest levied by the AO is more than Rs. 3 crore in the cities of Mumbai and Delhi are to be argued by the CIT(DR) and matters other than this are to be argued by the Senior DR
As per CBDT Instruction No. 9/2013 dated 22.07.2013, appeals against imposition of penalty or levy of interest in which the aggregate of penalty imposed or interest levied by the AO is more than Rs. 3 crore in the cities of Mumbai and Delhi are to be argued by the CIT(DR) and matters other than this are to be argued by the Senior DR
RIKEN SHAH
Department Head/ Business Development Consultant Of Crisil Ltd
INCOME TAX VAT TAX CONSULTANT
Cell : +91-942-879-9115 | Office : 02692 - 252717 +91 -942-649-9115
Website : www.shahriken.in | Skype – shahriken21
Other Contacts :
Facebook id https://www.facebook.com/rikens1
shah...@shahriken.in (Riken Shah)
tax@shahriken..in (CA DARSHITA SHAH)
v...@shahriken.in (Nimesh Patel)(Vat & Service Tax )
ns...@shahriken.in (Nootan Chauhan) (Pan Tan Tds Department )
t...@shahriken.in (Urvashi Thaker) (Income Tax Returns)
d...@shahriken.in (Vishal ) (Class !! & Class!!! Digital Signature)
au...@shahriken.in (Jagdish ,Harsh & Meet ( Incometax and Vat Audit)
p...@shahriken.in (Mayur & Vishal) for any kind of Investment Portfolio and Loan department
acc...@shahriken.in (Bhoomika & Shahin ) for any kind of Accounting Work
in...@shahriken.in (Balubhai shah for all other Misc Work)