Vanderlande Industries Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) A cursory glance at the definition of the term `Royalties’ makes it patent that the hitherto content of para 4 of Article 12 comprising of copyright royalty cases only became subject matter of sub-para (a) of the amended para 4 of Article 12. In addition, para 4(b) […]
Assistant Commissioner Vs C.P. Agro Industries (Rajasthan High Court) The Tax Board has neither recorded any cogent finding on merits of the case before setting aside the penalty nor it has considered the provisions of section 61 of the RVAT Act, 2003, more particularly, when the fact was proved before all the Authorities that Forms-C […]
Kontoor Brands Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) The issue on merit is regarding allowability of depreciation on intangible assets. On this aspect, the issue is covered by the Tribunal order rendered in the case of DCIT Vs. V.F. Arvind Brands Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Para nos. 12 of this Tribunal order are relevant in this […]
Tata Sons Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Bombay High Court find substance in the submission of Mr.Pardiwalla that the case at hand is nothing but an instance of mere change of opinion. A bare perusal of the reasons indicates that the exercise was infuenced by a mere change of opinion. To start with, it […]
Satya Narayan Banik Vs Union of India (Calcutta High Court) This Court is of the view that the object and purposes of Section 164 and 167, as amended is to ensure probity and the highest standard of governance in Companies both public and private. A failure to file balance sheet and the annual returns for […]
CIT Vs Roots Multiclean Ltd. (Madras High Court) It is abundantly clear from sub-section (2) of Section 80IA that an assessee who is eligible to claim deduction u/s 801A has the option to choose the initial/ first year from which it may desire the claim of deduction for ten consecutive years, out of a slab […]
Suraj Forwarders & Shipping Agencies Vs Principal Commissioner of GST & CE (CESTAT Chennai) The facts narrated as above establishes that service tax has been paid twice by the appellant for the very same taxable value. Though the department agrees that the earlier payment made by challan dated 05.01.2015 on the service tax registration number […]
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) In this case here is no allegation raised by the department that the appellant is not eligible to avail credit of the duties / taxes paid on the inputs / input services. To put it more clearly, the appellant would be eligible […]
ITO Vs Cozy Footwear Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Here in this case, the assessee company has received share application money from three parties. Two of them were Directors and one was a corporate entity M/s Omexpo Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. In so far as the share application money received from Directors, the AO has held the […]
ITAT Pune rules in favor of Ankit Enterprises, citing the treatment of unsold flats as stock-in-trade. Deemed rent addition not applicable.
