Assessing Officer is directed to tax interest on income tax refund under Article 11(2) of India- Malaysia DTAA and not as Business Income
CIT Vs Swapnil Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court of India) It is reported by learned counsel appearing for the respective parties that tax effect in both the appeals for the relevant Assessment Years – 1995-96 and 1996-97 would be less than Rs. 2 Crores which is the monetary limit to prefer an appeal before this […]
CBDT had issued guidelines dated 10th September, 2011 mandating prior approval of the CCIT for scrutiny assessment and in the present case that was not obtained.
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 […]
