|
II. Direct Taxes Case Laws:
1. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ms. Megha Dadoo, I.T.A. No. 23 of 2011, Date of Order: 17.03.2015, High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Whether
the process of cutting of stainless steel pipes of larger size with
electric cutter and including painting and welding of pipes amounts to
manufacture or production?
Held Yes.
The
Tribunal has held that the raw material procured and the finished
products produced by the assessee are not known in the market by the
same name. In fact, there are different brand names and different
uses/applications. Even though main component of the end product would
be stainless steel pipe, however, only when other components are used in
the manufacturing process, the final product, so manufactured and
marketed by the assessee, is produced. Without the use of other raw
products, the finished product cannot be produced or marketed. Also,
with the consumption of the raw material, the end product cannot be put
back in the same original condition. Even in terms of its value,
combined price of raw materials used to produce the finished product, is
lower than the price of the finished product. These findings of fact,
after having perused the record and heard learned counsel for the
parties, we find to be in no manner perverse or erroneous, warranting
interference. In fact, we are in agreement with the opinion so rendered
by the Tribunal.
(Please click here for judgment)
2. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Rakesh Mahajan, I.T.A. No.55 of 2009, Date of Order: 09.09.2015, High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Whether
the accounts maintained by the Assessee were incorrect and incomplete
in terms of section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, when it was not
possible to verify from such accounts whether any unvouched expenses
relating to one business, profits from which were declared on estimate
basis, have actually been debited in the accounts of another business ?
Held Yes
It
cannot be disputed that what is taxable under the Act is the real
accrued or arisen income and irrespective of the method of accountancy
adopted by the assessee, in case a true picture of the profits and
gains, that is to say, the real income is disclosed, then the same ought
not to be ordinarily disturbed. In such circumstances, the Department
is bound by the assessee’s choice of method regularly employed, but then
in case by this method, the true income or profit of accounts cannot be
arrived at, then the A.O. had every reason to invoke Section 145 of the
Act in order to work out the real income and thereby deduce the profit
and gain therefrom. As already observed earlier, the A.O. had given
cogent reasons for not accepting the accounts. Though, these findings
were set aside by the ITAT, but then even the ITAT did not conclude that
the method of accountancy as employed by the assessee was in any manner
correct. In absence of such findings, the order passed by the ITAT
cannot be sustained.
(Please click here for judgment)
|
|
III. Company Law & Other Matters:
1. Kamal Kumar Gupta Vs. Indus Marine Pvt. Ltd., C.P. No. 38 of 2013, Date of Judgment: 11.12.2013, Company Law Board - Mumbai
Under section 614 read with Section 303(2) of Companies Act 1956
As
per Board the said prayer is vague in case petitioner award a company a
sum of Rs. 10 Lacs as compensation for the mental agony that he
suffered on account of non-filing of E-form 32 and it does not fall
within the ambit and scope of the provisions contained in section 614 of
the Act. Therefore, the said prayer is liable to be rejected.
(Please click here for judgment)
2. Dr.
Pushpa Mohindra Vs. Sarvatra Road Runners Pvt Ltd., C.P. No.
122(ND)/2011, Date of Order: 23.11.2012, Company Law Board - New Delhi
In the matter of U/s 111, 397, 398, & 399 of the Companies Act 1956
Prayer
for rectification is premature in case the petitioner is required to
move an appropriate application before the Company and it is only on
refusal by the Company that it is open to the petitioner to make such
parayer U/S111.
(Please click here for judgment)
|
New User? 
Subscribe Now