M. Prabaharan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) Before us, the Chartered Accountant Shri Jeevarathinam categorically admitted in writing that the duplication of assets has happened while calculating the depreciation as per Income Tax Act while computing the tax computation sheet by his staff. He admitted that while doing so, the staff has wrongly computed the deprecation value […]
Vikas Jain Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) In view of the report of DDIT (Inv.) Unit-7(1) and 7(3) Mumbai, shared with the AO which suggests that the LTCG earned by the petitioner in AY 2014-15 was bogus and since, the said LTCG was claimed as exempt income, the AO at this stage, concluded that the […]
Shubhlakshmi Polysters Ltd. Vs C.C.E. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT find that the adjudication authority in respect of disputed input services denied the credit without discussing the nature and use of the services in the Appellant’s factory. In order to find out the eligibility of a particular service as ‘input service’ under such definition, the nature and […]
Arsha Vijnana Trust Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes (Supreme Court of India) During the course of hearing, learned senior advocate appearing for the appellant states that he has instructions not to press the present appeal as the denial of grant of exemption/benefit under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even if set […]
XYZ (Confidential) Vs Alphabet Inc. (Competition Commission of India) CCI imposes monetary penalty of Rs. 936.44 crore on Google for anti-competitive practices in relation to its Play Store policies The Competition Commission of India (CCI) today imposed a penalty of Rs. 936.44 crore on Google for abusing its dominant position with respect to its Play Store […]
ITO Vs Solid Machinery Co Pvt Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) It was noticed that the assessee has made purchases of textile items, i.e. fabrics, worth Rs 19,22,05,946 from a large number of entities, and sold all these goods to three entities- namely Global Softech Limited, Ravi Raj Industries, and Tayal Energy Limited, for amounts aggregating to […]
Madras High Court held that as the Appellate Tribunal is the ultimate fact finding authority, it is incumbent on the part of the Appellate Tribunal to examine the claim on the basis of additional documents/ evidences. Accordingly, matter remanded back to Appellate Tribunal to re-examine the issue.
Gujarat High Court held that the expression or word sufficient cause’ occurring in section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963, cannot be construed in a static form. Delay in filing of an appeal on account of rectification application and Lockdown duly condoned.
NCLT Mumbai approved the resolution plan submitted by AM Mining India Pvt. Ltd. for Uttam Galva Steel Limited as the same is not contrary to provisions of section 29A of IBC Code and is in accordance with law
Commissioner of Central Excise Pune III Vs Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd (Supreme Court) The question before the learned Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [for short ‘the Tribunal’] was whether the service tax was payable on a premium in terms of the insurance policy covering the future period at revised rates, if […]
