Ericsson India Private Limited Vs Commissioner, Customs (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT held that amount paid for the same duty but twice, one of the payment has to be refunded. Otherwise also in terms of section 17 of Limitation Act, whenever there is an application for a relief from the consequences of a mistake, the period of […]
It is not at the whim or fancy of a tax authority to decide as to what constitutes ‘beneficial ownership’; it is absolutely fundamental that as what constitutes beneficial ownership must also be examined and categorical findings are given as to how these requirements of beneficial ownership are satisfied in the present case.
Tasleem Ahmed Vs Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) In this case appellant has clearly abused the process and has filed this appeal against the order dated June 30, 2017, which order was earlier assailed by the appellant by filing Excise Appeal no. 50087 of 2018 and this appeal was dismissed […]
This criminal case is filed by the Official Liquidator under section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956 as the accused persons did not file statement of affairs within the stipulated time.
Tata Sponge Iron Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Cuttack) The fundamental requirement of showing the income from “eligible” unit in the gross total income is mandatory which was not complied by the assessee in order to claim deduction u/s.80IA of the amount equal to the income generated by the eligible unit. Facts- The appellant is company […]
Board of Trustees for Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port Vs Marinecraft Engineers Private Limited (Calcutta High Court) The disputes between the parties pertain to the deductions made by the petitioner under diverse heads from the moneys which were due and payable to the respondent. The respondent being a unit entitled to the benefits of the Micro […]
Karcher Cleaning Systems Pvt Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) The assessee is a pure trading company involved in the distribution activity without adding any value to the purchased product and hence the RPM is the most appropriate method. Facts- The assessee is a subsidiary of Karcher Beteilgungs GmbH which started its commercial activities on 16.04.2011 […]
Dr. Kalpana Alexander Vs. ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) There is nothing to contradict the opinion of the learned PCIT that there is failure on the part of the learned Assessing Officer to make the minimum enquiry, let alone sufficient enquiry on this aspect. Assessment order held erroneous. Facts- The assessee is an individual, and a medical […]
Indus Towers Ltd Vs Income Tax Officer (Delhi High Court) Having perused the letter dated 9th May, 2022 written by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur, this Court is of the view that the said Income Tax Officer had no jurisdiction to issue notice dated 14th March, 2022 to propose initiation of reassessment proceedings, […]
Bagadia Properties Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) It cannot be always presumed that the loans given to subsidiary companies are for business purposes. It is required to be proved that the subsidiary company has used the interest free loans for some business purposes. Facts- The assessee is undertaking the business of real estate development […]
