Job Vacancy: [ACCA_Profs] Imp Verdict On S. 2(22)(e) Deemed Dividend + The Future Of Virtual Courts By Justice Chandrachud + Article On S. 143(2) Notice

See the footer if you would like to unsubscribe from the newsletter

Dear Subscriber,

The following important updates are available at itatonline.org:

Exotica Housing & Infrastructure Company Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)

S. 2(22)(e) is a deeming provision & should be construed strictly. The section uses the expression "by way of advances or loans" which shows that all payments received from the sister company cannot be treated as deemed dividend but only payments which bear the characteristics of loans and advances. Under the law, all loans and advances are debts, but all debts are not loans and advances. The term 'loans and advances' is not defined & has to be understood in the commercial sense. Advances given for purely temporary financial accommodation for business purposes does not attract the deeming fiction (All imp judgements referred)

After hearing both the parties and perusing the relevant records, it reveals that they are in the form of current and inter banking accounts and contain both types of entries i.e. giving and taking the amount and appear to be a current account and cannot be considered as loans and advances as contemplated u/s 2(22)(e) of the IT Act

The Future Of Virtual Courts And Access To Justice In India By Dr. Justice D. Y. Chandrachud

Dr. Justice D. Y. Chandrachud addressed a webinar organized by the NALSAR University of Law in which he explained in detail the concept of "virtual courts". He highlighted the problems facing the implementation of the concept and the possible solutions. Snehal Kanzarkar, a law student, has prepared a summary of the views expressed by the ld. Judge in the webinar

Whether Notice U/s 143(2) Is A Preliminary Requirement For Valid Assessments U/s 153A/153C Or 147?

CA Rohit Kapoor has considered the important question whether the issue of a notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is a mandatory or a directory requirement and whether its non-issue is a curable defect or renders the entire assessment void. He has also examined whether the participation by the assessee in the assessment proceedings can save the assessment order under section 292BB of the Act. All the important judgements on the subject have been referred to

See Also: Digest of case laws (updated regularly) containing latest judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals

Tata Education and Development Trust vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

S. 254(2A): ITAT President to consider whether a Special Bench should be constituted to decide two very significant aspects relating to the powers of the ITAT to grant unconditional stay of demand after the amendment in first proviso to s. 254(2A) by the Finance Act 2020, namely, (i) The legal impact, if any, of the amendment on the powers of the Tribunal u/s 254(1) to grant stay; and, (ii) if the amendment is held to have any impact on the powers of the Tribunal u/s 254(1),- (a) whether the amendment is directory in nature or is mandatory in nature; (b) whether the said amendment affects the cases in which appeals were filed prior to the date on which the amendment came into force; (c) whether, with respect to the manner in which, and nature of which, security is to be offered by the assessee, under first proviso to s. 254(2A), what are broad considerations and in what reasonable manner, such a discretion must essentially be exercised, while granting the stay,by the Tribunal

__._,_.___

Posted by: "editor@itatonline.org" <itatonline.org@gmail.com>

Reply via web post

•

Reply to sender

•

Reply to group

•

Start a New Topic

•

Messages in this topic (1)

Visit Your Group