"14 October 2022" Archive

Refund of IGST allowed on exported goods after deduction of drawback duty

Kishan Lal Kuria Mal International Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Whether or not refund of IGST on exported goods will be allowed in the present petition after deduction of the drawback duty?...

Read More

Parallel GST proceedings cannot be conducted by 3 wings of same department for same tax period

Held that since the audit proceedings under Section 65 of the CGST Act was already commenced by the …., it is but appropriate that the proceedings should be taken to the logical end by the …., and the proceedings in...

Read More

Penalty cannot be imposed on declared income shown in return of income 

DCIT Vs Mahalaxmi Realtors (ITAT Pune)

DCIT Vs Mahalaxmi Realtors (ITAT Pune) ITAT held that findings in the assessment proceedings cannot be regarded as conclusive for the purpose of the penalty proceedings. It is also well settled that the criteria and yardstick for the purpose of imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) are different than those applied for making or confirming the ad...

Read More

Amortization & allowability of Expenses under section 35D & 37- ITAT remands matter back to AO

DCIT Vs L & T Access Distribution Services Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)

DCIT Vs L & T Access Distribution Services Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) On the one hand, it is argued by the Ld. A.R. for the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) that the expenditure of Rs.13.30 crores is for the purpose of setting up of the business of the assessee, but at the same time argued that […]...

Read More

Resolution Plan cannot be permitted to be withdrawn after approval: NCLAT

Shraddha Buildcon Pvt. Ltd Vs Dhar Textile Mills Ltd (NCLAT Delhi)

NCLAT held that in event the submission of Appellant is accepted that due to financial difficulty he is unable to implement Resolution plan and he be permitting to go back from the commitments made in the Resolution Plan, it shall have disastrous effect on the entire process undertaken....

Read More

Advocate cannot be sued For Cheating/Fraud Merely on Losing Case

K S Mahadevan Vs Cyprian Menezes S/O Late Camil Menezes (Karnataka High Court)

Merely because a client were not to succeed in the matter and favourable orders were not passed in favour of that particular client, the said client cannot make out a case that there is a fraud which has been committed by the Advocate and offence under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC which has been committed by an Advocate....

Read More

Arbitration – Legal remedy cannot be extended by consent

Extramarks Education India Private Limited Vs Ram School (Delhi High Court)

Extramarks Education India Private Limited Vs Ram School (Delhi High Court) The petitioner’s other objection, that since in its reply dated 31.08.2021 the respondent themselves were willing to accept and had given their consent for appointment of an arbitrator “near to the locality” where the respondents were located, is neither her...

Read More

Income Tax Offence can be Compound before Conviction but Not Thereafter

Ramesh Jain Vs Union of India (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

By conjoint reading of section 279(2) and clauses 7(v) and 8. (iii), it is explicit that the Income Tax Authorities have the power to compound the offence either before or after the institution of the proceedings but certainly not after the conviction....

Read More

Section 54 exemption cannot be denied merely for purchase of property in Joint name

Kamlesh Keswani Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)

Kamlesh Keswani Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) HC held that petitioner is entitled to claim exemption under Section 54 of the Act on these admitted facts, as the conditions stipulated in Section 54 stand fulfilled. The New Property would be treated as the property purchased by the petitioner in his name and merely because he […]...

Read More

Classification to be determined on Common parlance/principal purpose/end user test: SC

Thermax Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (Supreme Court of India)

In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after taking definition of the particular product in HSN, applying common parlance test, principal purpose test and end user test held that the product in dispute is Modified Vapour Absorption Chillers (MVAC) falling under heading 84.18 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff ...

Read More

Search Posts by Date

January 2023