Join our webinar on Faceless Tax Assessments under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn concepts, challenges, and solutions from expert CA Hari Agarwal, FCA.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-II Vs. Mishal Zinc Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Indo Deutsh Metallo Chemique Ltd. [2014-TIOL1 725-CESTAT-MUM] The Respondents are manufacturer of White Zinc Oxide and having two units (a) Mishal Zinc Industries Pvt. Ltd (the Unit 1) and (b) Indo Deutsch Metallo Chimique Ltd (the Unit 2) [the Respondents]. Till August 1998, […]
The Central Board of Excise and Customs has issued an instruction F. No. 6/8/2014- CX.1 dated September 17, 2014 in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Super Synotex India Ltd. [2014-TIOL-19-SCCX] on the issue of abatement of Sales Tax under an abatement scheme where the Assesse has been allowed to […]
In the instant case, Essar Projects Ltd. (Essar) sold the entire business pertaining to their ‘Construction Division’ to Essar Construction (I) Ltd. (the New Company), w.e.f. June 30, 2006 as per ‘Business Transfer Agreement’. The Department contended that amount received by the New Company on account of the services rendered post June 30, 2006, though the entire Service tax liability pertaining to these services had already been discharged by Essar, the New Company is liable to pay Service tax on same. The Department issued Show Cause Notice to the New Company and the demand was confirmed by the Adjudicating authority.
The Hon’ble CESTAT, Ahmedabad, held that as per Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules, if consignor or consignee is one of the specified entities, then person liable to pay Service tax would be person liable to pay freight. Since consignor i.e. EOL was a factory as per Factories Act and a company under Companies Act, GTA service provider i.e., the Appellant was not liable to Service tax.
Refund of Service tax on services not provided cannot be denied on ground that same was not shown as ‘receivable’ in Balance Sheet Radico Khaitan Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi [(2014) 48 taxmann.com 340 (New Delhi – CESTAT)] Radico Khaitan Ltd. (the Appellant) entered into an agreement with Diageo Radico Distrilleries Pvt. Ltd. […]
the Additional Commissioner of Customs, (Port-Import), Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House, Nhava Sheva, Taluka- Uran, District- Raigad, Maharashtra-400707;
It is clear that the assessee may be under the bonafide belief that TDS is not liable to be deducted on payments made to non-banking financial institution. Section 273B of the Income Tax Act provides that no penalty under section 271C shall be imposable on the person or the assessee as the case may be, for any failure referred to in the said provisions, if he proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure.
Import of Water-mark Bank Note Paper may be made, without an import licence, by the Note Printing Presses of the Government of India, namely, Currency Note Press, Nasik; Bank Note Press, Dewas both units of Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited (SPMCIL); Bharatiya Reserve Bank Note Mudran Ltd.(BRBNMPL) units in Mysore, Salboni and Bangalore, subject to submission of a certificate of import from the Head of units and with actual user condition.
in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 read with paragraph 2.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-2014, as amended from time to time, the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in Import Policy of Chapter 10 of ITC (HS) 2012, Schedule 1 (Import Policy).
Based on the representations received from the stock exchanges and recommendations of the Secondary Market Advisory Committee (SMAC), it has been decided to modify certain clauses in the aforesaid guidelines:
