Refund under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules also being a refund under section 11B would squarely fall within the ambit of Section 11BB and interest is payable in case of delay in sanctioning the refund under Rule 5
DCIT Vs Crystal Glaze (ITAT Ahmedabad) ITAT considered judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in case of Zirconia Cera Tech Glazes vs. DCIT wherein addition was made only on basis of show cause notice issued by Excise Department against assessee alleging that assessee was engaged in undervaluation of sales and clandestine removal of goods and […]
Read about the CESTAT decision in the case of Globus Infocomm Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import), where the plea for change of classification was accepted. The order directs the re-examination of classification, duty demands, mis-declaration allegations, and penalties.
Education cess paid by the respondent-assessee would not be allowed as an expenditure under Section 37 read with 40 (a) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
A mere discrepancy in filing the Income Tax Return instead of the Income Certificate, despite the two documents evidencing the same parameters of income requirements, cannot lead to a situation where an eligible meritorious candidate is deprived of the scholarship.
Not only the order is nonspeaking, but cryptic in nature and the reason of cancellation not decipherable therefrom. Principles of natural justice stand violated and the order needs to be quashed as it entails penal and pecuniary consequences.
Ranvir Kumar Karan Vs Union of India (Madhya Pradesh High Court) In view of the Apex court judgment in Civil Appeal No.10177 of 2018 in the case of Union of India vs. Hind Energy and Coal Benefication (India Ltd.) HC dismisses plea challenging Levy and collection of cess under Section 8 of the Goods and […]
High Court held Declaration forms or ‘C’ Forms are required to be issued by the relevant State, which in the present case is State of Rajasthan.
ITAT held that matter relating to wages/labour expenses which was not subject matter of limited scrutiny cannot be raised in revisionary proceedings u/s 263 for the first time.
Admittedly, the issuance of notice and initiation of re-assessment proceeding are beyond six years and, prima facie, it is barred by limitation both under the old Act as well as under newly amended provision relating to Section 147 of the Act.
