1. Vatika Limited Vs. ITO, W.P.(C) 13878/2009, Date of Decision: 13/02/2012, HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Issue:
whether notice u/s 148 is valid even if it issued after four year and assessee has disclosed full & true particular of claim at the time of original assessment proceeding.
Held:
Assessee had disclosed full and true particular relating to claim of depreciation at time of original assessment then assessing officer has no jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148 of the Act, after the period of four year from the end of relevant assessment year. We, therefore, issue a writ of certiorari quashing the notice under Section 148 of the Act.
(Please click here for judgment)
2. Tejinder Singh Vs DCIT, I.T.A. No.: 1459/ Kol. / 2011, Date of the order : 29/02/2012, ITAT- KOLKATA
Whether Section 50C is applicable on transfer of leasehold right in building.
Section 50 C can come into play only in a situation “where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed or assessable by any authority of a State Government …… for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer”. Clearly, therefore, it is sine qua non for application of Section 50 C that the transfer must be of a “capital asset, being land or building or both”, but then a leasehold right in such a capital asset cannot be equated with the capital asset per se.
Therefore, when a leasehold right in “land or building or both” is transferred, the provisions of Section 50C cannot be invoked.
(Please click here for judgment)
IV. Tenders Info. :
-
Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Appointment as Internal Auditors for Scrutinizing the claims/ files
Multi States
Click for detail
-
Director General School Education
Interest for Engagement of Statutory Audit of the Accounts
Chandigarh
Click for detail
New User? 
Subscribe Now