"23 November 2012" Archive

Registration to a trust can be denied if it was charging fees for citizen services in addition to statutory fees

Sukhmani Society For Citizen Services Vs Commissioner of Income-tax, Bathinda (ITAT Amritsar)

The present society is doing its business and charging huge fees from the public which was in addition to the prescribed fee of the Punjab Government. Even otherwise, the fees charged by the present society is in addition to the burden forced upon the common-man. Because of this service has to be rendered by the Punjab Government free of ...

Read More

Income from sale of abandoned cargo by a custodian of goods not liable to Service tax

Maersk India (P.) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Mumbai)

The counsel for the appellant submits that in Board's Circular No. 11/1/2002-TRU dated 01/08/2002 it has been clarified that Service Tax is not leviable on the activities of the custodian when he auctions abandoned cargo and VAT/ST is paid in respect of such cargo. ...

Read More

Providing adequate support staff to all assessment units – CBDT

Letter [F. No. HRD/CMD/123/2/2011-12/2301] (23/11/2012)

Assessment officers of many charges have conveyed to the Board that they are not being provided any secretarial assistance or other office help and they are left with no option but to make private arrangement to finalise their assessment orders and other time bound matters....

Read More

Taxability of Share Profit of Assessee maintaining separate investment and trading portfolio

Jignesh Indulal Patel Vs Income-tax Officer, 4(1)(2), Mumbai (ITAT Mumbai)

There is no dispute that the assessee is maintaining two separate portfolios i.e. investment portfolio and trading portfolio. The A.O. has admitted the said position consistently in the past. It is pointed out that the shares in question which are subject matter of short term capital gain and long term capital gain are part of the investm...

Read More

Extension of time to submit ITR-V cannot validate a time-barred S.143(2) notice

M/s E.K.K. & Co Vs. The A.C.I.T. (ITAT Cochin)

The scheme frame by the CBDT clearly says that where the return was filed electronically with digital signature the acknowledgment generated electronically shall be evidence for filing of the return. Wherever, the return was filed electronically without digital signature, on successful transmission, the computer shall generate acknowledge...

Read More

Water supply project not coverd under Erection, Commissioning or Installation Services

Lalit Constructions Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad (CESTAT Mumbai)

Water supply project is an infrastructure facility and a civic amenity which the State provides in public interest and not an activity of commerce or industry. Therefore, the appellants are not covered under the category of Erection, Commissioning or Installation Services." Following the precedent decision in the case of Indian Hume Pipe ...

Read More

No addition to income for festival discount given, if the same is Practice in Industry

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs Krishna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)

The question, whether the above difference between the fair market price and the concessional price should or should not be added to the total income of the assessee(s) Society, needs to be re-looked by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for short, 'CIT(A)']. Apart from the afore-stated question, CIT(A) would take into account, whether...

Read More

Regulatory function performed by BIS is not a business activity

Bureau of Indian Standards Vs Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions) (Delhi High Court)

Statutory bodies (including BIS) are empowered to frame rules or regulations, exercise coercive powers, including inspection, raids; they possess search and seizure powers and are invariably subjected to Parliamentary or legislative oversight. The primary object for setting up such regulatory bodies would be to ensure general public utili...

Read More

Penalty cannot be presumed to be passed on to another person

Shree Perfect Security Services (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax, Ahmedabad (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

In view of the presumption in the law that an penal liability can never be passed on to another person who has not committed the offence, the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Offshore Hook-up that department has to prove that unjust enrichment would mean that some extra effort is required in addition to merely looking at the bala...

Read More

Order passed by appellate authority without application of mind liable to be set aside

J.B.M. Auto Components Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I (CESTAT Delhi)

Appellate authority has not applied his own independent mind to various issues involved in the appeal and various contentions raised by the appellant. It stand simply observed by the appellate authority that all the issues stand discussed in detail by the adjudicating authority and he find himself in agreement with the same. ...

Read More

Featured Posts