Add-on
AY 2015-16
Jul 27, 2015 - The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has specified a value for the cost inflation index for 2015-16. A cost inflation index helps reduce the ...
< CBDT Top Brass Expresses Shock And Dismay At Apathy Of
(A) "straining ITS resources" - meaning both time and energy of not only Revenue but of taxpayers as well;
itat on CAs' tax practice
Vijay V. Meghani vs. ACIT (MA By ICAI) (ITAT Mumbai)
Strictures passed against ICAI By ITAT for
alleged “deteriorating standards” and
“losing its grip over the Income tax matters”
toned down on the basis that they were made in the context
of a "hypothetical situation" and were not
"intended to criticize the functioning of the
ICAI"
The Income tax Appellate Tribunal, being a part of
Government of India, should not shut its eyes when it is
noticed that certain developments occurring in the Country
may affect the Country as a whole, more particularly when
the reputation of particular profession, from whom the
Tribunal is getting assistance in the dispensation of
justice, is at stake. Accordingly, we sincerely believe that
it is the bounden duty of not only the Tribunal, but also
the duty of one and all to point out and discuss about such
kind of developments, when it is noticed that the same may
affect the public at large. There cannot be any controversy
that the interest of our Country is Supreme and no citizen
can or should compromise on the same
AY 2015-16
Cost Inflation Index,Indexation and Long Term Capital Gains ...
www.bemoneyaware.com/blog/cost-inflation-index/
Aug 1, 2015 - FINANCIALYEAR, COST INFLATION INDEX. 2015-16, 1081. 2014-15, 1024. 2013-14, 939. 2012-13, 852. 2011-12, 785. 2010-2011, 711.
CBDT raises cost inflation index by 5.57% for 2015-16 - The ...
www.thehindubusinessline.com/...cost-inflation-index...201516/article74...
CBDT Instruction Streamlines Litigation In High Courts
In view of the repeated strictures passed by judicial
bodies on the gross inefficiencies of the income-tax
department relating to litigation, the CBDT has issued
Instruction No. 06 dated 03.07.2015 setting out clear-cut
responsibilities of the CIT (Judicial)
< <<<
An Update:
An Update:
Attention may be invited to the latest move by the CBDT in
an attempt to ward off/mitigate unending litigation growingly suffered by
taxpayers HERE
In the directive of the highest executive authority, instances
are mentioned for sampling. If were to be exhaustively listed, likely to prove
a formidable task, many more such as the one @
should top such list.
< CBDT Top Brass Expresses Shock And Dismay At Apathy Of
An attempt , a call , wake-up , not for the first time though.
'Bitten once, but twice shy,- is an age old saying; here is
an ominous instance of having been 'bitten again and again' , also remedy applied, but with no lasting effect - not even once shy, so to say !
Dept
Even In Sensitive Search Cases
.........
3. Further, besides financial costs,
litigation also entails tarnishing the image of the Department and straining
its resources. The significance of filing appeal and pursuing litigation only
in deserving cases cannot be over-emphasized, more so in the backdrop of the
fact that Department is facing shortage of officers at all levels. It is
imperative that the available resources are optimally utilised to obtain
maximum benefit out of litigation.
No mention is noted to have been made, unwittingly or otherwise, of not-so-obvious other viewpoints:
(A) "straining ITS resources" - meaning both time and energy of not only Revenue but of taxpayers as well;
in the ultimate analysis, the whole brunt of the burden come to be borne by / falls on the shoulders of taxpayers, and their only;
(B) in turn, strains the resources of the adjudicating authorities / judicial, quasi judicial as well; and
(C) in the result, causes inexplicable but avoidable delay in disposal, mounting of pendency, and in no less measure impacting and impairing the quality of justice itself.
In short, not been released is the fundamental truth that Quantity and Quality are bad bed-mates, the former having an adversarial impact on the latter, if were in inverse proportion.
Left open to the righteous minded tax experts in field practice to 'EDIT' !
< May have more to add
<<<<
Institute for Development and Research in Banking Technology (IDRBT) vs. ADIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
CITATION:
|
|
S. 2(15)/ 11: Important principles of what is a
"charitable purpose" and the scope of the proviso to section 2(15)
of the Act explained
TAGS | |
- CBDT Announces Ambitious National Judicial Reference System Project
- CBDT Stung By Judicial Strictures – Sets Up Committee To Study Filing Of Appeals
- CBDT Takes Stern View Of Laxity By Counsel And CIT In Court Matters
- CBDT Revises Monetary Limit For Filing Appeals To ITAT, High Court And SC
- Revision in Monetary Limits for filing Departmental Appeals before the Appellate Authorities
No comments:
Post a Comment