Bombay High Court held that since the Commissioner failed to complete the assessment for the relevant years within a period of ten years of issuing the initial notice in Form-H, the notice is quashed.
CESTAT Mumbai held that products Zymegold Plus and Dripzyme are classifiable under CTH 3101 as Fertilizer and not as Plant Growth Regulator.
ITAT Chandigarh held that disallowance of expenses u/s 14A read with Rule 8D is unwarranted on the premise that the investment in shares were stock-in-trade.
ITAT Delhi held that PCIT is not empowered to invoke revisionary proceedings u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, merely because he is not agree with the view taken by the AO. Accordingly, revisionary proceedings bad in law.
CESTAT Delhi held that if the Bank officials despite verification are not able to detect the fraudulent nature of the documents, how can one expect from CHA who is not even a public official to unearth the dubious plan of the exporter.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance made under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot extent exempt income earned by the assessee. Accordingly, AO is directed to restrict the disallowance u/s. 14A to the extent of exempt income.
ITAT Delhi held that global operation fees cannot be taxed as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) under the provisions of the Act and the India-UK DTAA as it doesn’t satisfy the ‘make available’ clause contained in Article 13(4)(c) of the India-UK DTAA.
E-waste (Management) Rules 2022 – regarding release of imported consignments of producers of 85 EEEs items (ITEW 17 to ITEW 27, CEEW 6 to CEEW 19, LSEEW 1 to LSEEW 34, EETW 1 to EETW 8, TLSEW 1 to TLSEW6, MDW 1 to MDW 10 and LIW1 to LIW 2) – reg.
The Registrar of Companies (ROC) in Delhi has recently imposed penalties on a company, including its Independent Directors (ID) and Non-Executive Directors (NED), for violations related to the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) provisions under Section 135(5) of the Companies Act, 2013. The case involves the company’s failure to spend the required amount on CSR activities […]
ITAT Hyderabad held that statement of a third party already recorded u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act cannot be considered as an incriminating document for the purpose of making the addition u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act.
