"10 March 2013" Archive

HC refer back the matter to ITAT as order was non speaking and without application of mind

Commissioner of Income-tax, Ranchi Vs Metallurgical Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd., Ranchi (Jharkhand High Court)

From perusal of the observation of the Tribunal, it is clear that the Tribunal has not decided as to for what reasons, the reasons given by the appellate authority ware found to be wrong and virtually it is a non-speaking order, deciding nothing....

Read More

Deduction U/s. 80HHC cannot be claimed on profit on which deduction U/S. 80IA already been claimed

Commissioner of Income-tax-I, Ludhiana Vs Abhishek Industries Ltd. (Punjab And Hariyana High Court)

The respondent-assessee, in the present case, had in its return of income tax, claimed deduction under Section 80IA at Rs. 12.01 crores and Section 80HHC of the IT Act at Rs. 5.75 crores and declared the total income of Rs. 82.47 lacs. The AO allowed the deduction under Section 80IA to the tune of Rs. 14.04 crores and deduction under Sect...

Read More

Books cannot be rejected merely because loss declared by the Assessee was very high

Commissioner of Income-tax, Varanasi Vs Jananamandal Ltd. (Allahabad High Court)

If the books of account cannot be rejected, there is no question of not accepting the loss declared by the assessee. In a business, sometimes the business runs in profit and sometimes runs in loss. Merely because in a particular year, the loss was higher, that would not empower the Assessing Officer to reject the books of accounts, unless...

Read More

Capital reserve arising from amalgamation in the nature of merger is a capital receipt

Income-tax Officer, Ward 7(3), Kolkata Vs Shreyans Investments (P.) Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata)

We have noted that the Assessing Officer's observations to the effect that 'business' under section 28 has a very broad meaning and may be used in different connotations" and that it includes adventure in the nature of trade, as also his reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Rajputana Textiles (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT ...

Read More

A member can ask for inspection of Companies record any time after he became Member

Rajendra G. Patel Vs Sanghi Industries Ltd. (Chennai, Company Law Board)

The statute provides a right to the member or debenture-holder for inspection of the statutory registers and records as contemplated u/s 163 of the Act. The inspection is allowed to a member or debenture-holder without fee and any other person on payment of such sum as may be prescribed for each inspection. The member or debenture-holder ...

Read More

Services received from IFC & ADB not, prima facie, liable to service tax

Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai (CESTAT Mumbai)

As per Article 56 of the Schedule to the ADB Act, the bank, its assets, property, income and its operations and transactions, shall be exempt from all taxation and from all customs duties. The Bank shall also be exempt from any obligation for the payment, withholding or collection of any tax or duty and Section 5 of the ADB Act clearly sa...

Read More

Input services used in trading activity & in production of non-excisable goods not eligible for Cenvat Credit

Loreal India (P.) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune (CESTAT Mumbai)

First issue involved in the appeal is whether the Cenvat credit available on raw materials and services used for non-excisable goods is admissible to the appellants. Under the Cenvat Credit Rules, input means all goods used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products whether directly or indirectly and whether contained in the f...

Read More

Despite no financial hardship plea court may grant waiver of pre-deposit on merits

A Plus Projects Technology (P.) Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)

We find merit in the submission of Mr. Apte that the order dated 18.10.2012 directing the petitioner to deposit of Rs.35 lacs is non speaking order. The impugned order does not consider and/or examine submission made by the petitioner in support of its prima facie case to take a prima facie view. ...

Read More

HC has power to condone delay beyond the period of 180 days if sufficient cause exists

Commissioner of Central Excise, GOA Vs General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (Bombay High Court)

With effect from 1st day of July 2003, section 108 of The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009 specifically confers power on the High Court to condone delay beyond the period of 180 days, if the High Court is satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not filing the same within the said period. Section 108 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009 while in...

Read More

Court may direct investigation but Govt only can appoint agency

Bhagyraaj Vyapaar (P.) Ltd. Vs Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs (Calcutta High Court)

The authority of Court to direct investigation was elaborately considered by us in our earlier decision when we ultimately permitted the Central Government to carry on investigation. The decisions in the case of Sreeman Chunder Dey (supra), Vinay Metal Printers (P.) Ltd. (supra) and Ushacomm India (P.) Ltd. (supra) were considered by us i...

Read More