Supreme Court of India while interpreting Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, which is for rebate of excise duty, has held in the case of Spentex Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise that Rebate of Duty is Admissible Both on Inputs i.e raw materials and Final Goods.
ORDER NO. 198 OF 2015- In order to address the large pendency before DRPs at Mumbai and Bengaluru, the CBDT has decided to create additional Benches i.e. DRP-3 at Mumbai DRP-2 at Bengaluru until further orders. In pursuance of this, the officers post in the charge of CIT (A) mentioned in Col. 3 of the table below are posted as Members of DRPs mentioned in Col. 2 until further orders:-
ne of the pillars of the of the taxation proposals included in the Finance Minister’s budget speech for 2015-16 was extension of benefits to the middle class. In this process the Finance Minister announced extension of certain benefits in respect of medical treatment under section 80DDB. This section allows a deduction for expenditure incurred on treatment of specified ailments.
Instruction No. 14/2015 while scrutinizing the cases of entities engaged in the business of mining, the Annual Returns filed with IBM by the respective assessees should invariably be obtained and compared with the details submitted to the Income-tax Department so as to ascertain whether any suppression of production and discrepancy in stock exists and further necessary action as per provisions of law may be taken.
Notification No. 19/2015-Service Tax Central Government is satisfied that in the period commencing on and from the 1st day of July, 2012 and ending with the 13th day of October, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the said period) according to a practice that was generally prevalent, there was nonlevy of service tax on the services provided by an Indian Bank or other entity acting as an agent to the Money Transfer Service Operators (hereinafter referred to as MTSO), in relation to remittance of foreign currency from outside India to India (hereinafter referred to as the said practice), and this service was liable to service tax, which was not being paid according to the said practice.
a. Assessee had filed return of income on 27-10-2006 u/s 139(1) and original assessment was done by AO u/s 143(3) vide order dated 15.12.2008. b. Subsequently, this case was reopened u/s 147 and AO framed re-assessment order dated 31.12.2012 u/s 143 read with 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961.
In the case of ITO Vs Bimal Biswas, ITAT of Kolkata set aside the issue to the file of AO and directed the assessee to produce the relevant evidence in respect payees of carriage charges whether they have included the carriage receipts in the respective returns of income and paid taxes on the said income
The Hon’ble Sikkim High Court in the case of Future Gaming & Hotel Services Private Limited and others held that activities of distributors & agents selling lottery tickets cannot be considered as activities for facilitating promotion of lottery tickets issued by state government
ITAT Ahmedabad held In the case of ACIT vs. The Mehsana Urban Co-op. Bank Ltd. that intention of assessee at the time of purchase of securities is relevant factore to decide whether it is held for trading or investment .
Whether the Assessee is eligible to claim rebate of Excise duty paid on inputs used in exported goods as well the Excise duty paid on exported final products under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 (the Excise Rules)?
