Principal Commissioner of Custom Vs. Riso India (P.) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Duty’ as defined in Section 2(15) of the Customs Act, is wide enough to cover all kinds of duty, including SAD. Hence, as per Section 3(8) of Customs Tariff Act
Dailmer Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT MUMBAI] When import of identical cars have been made at lower values which are comparable to the value declared at the time of filing Bill of Entry for sale of the cars imported under Carnet
Gupta Steel Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar – Supreme Court held that price was genuinely revised & gets reduced by amending the MOA and there was nothing wrong on the part of the Appellant to declare the price in the BOE.
Challenger Computers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Trade & Taxes (Delhi High Court) In terms of the Section 51(a) of the DVAT Act, the selling dealer will issue the credit note to the buying dealer where the sales are subsequently reduced.
Zylog Systems (P) Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes- Where the smart cards are prepared in terms of an agreement with the customer by embedding requisite information, which couldn’t be sold in open market
The Department denied the Cenvat credit to Reliance Industries Ltd. (the Appellant) on the ground that the Service tax paid on the life insurance/ medi-claim policy for the existing employees and retired employees is ineligible as they are not covered under the definition
India Housing (the Appellant), a service provider, took Cenvat credit on certain input services. The Department denied the Cenvat credit on the ground that the Appellant has taken Cenvat credit on the documents which are not the correct documents as per the Rule 9(2) of the Credit Rules.
The ITAT Chandigarh in the case of Mahabir Educational Welfare Society vs. DCIT held that for claiming exemption u/s 10)(23C)(iiiad) filling of return of income as per the law applicable for AY 2005-06 and 2006-07 was not mandatory as the gross receipts not exceeded Rs. 1 crore
Supreme Court held In the case of ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. that Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment.
Quorum here means the minimum number of directors to be present at the board meeting in order to hold the board meeting. The provisions related to the minimum no. of directors i.e. quorum is provided u/s 174 of the companies Act 2013.
