Explore Vaman Prestressing Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT case where Bombay High Court discusses reopening of assessments, commercial expediency, and need for a valid belief.
Explore case of SMS Logistics vs. Commissioner of Customs, where punishment imposed on a customs broker is analyzed for proportionality and compliance with regulations.
CESTAT Kolkata held that appellant were under the bonafide belief that processes undertaken by them doesn’t amount to manufacture and accordingly, they cleared goods to raw material supplier on collection of job charges only. Accordingly, extended period of limitation not invocable.
CESTAT Allahabad held that denial of refund claim of service tax under notification no. 9/2009-ST dated 03.03.2009 as taxable service in respect of which refund is claim is not mentioned in the list of specified service approved by SEZ authority unjustified.
In present facts of the case, Petitioner has been engaged in the business of marketing and manufacturing of footwear and fashion products and is the first user and proprietor of well-known trademark ‘LIBERTY’. On 01.04.2001, Petitioner and Respondent entered into a Registered User Agreement in respect of trademark ‘LIBERTY’ in Class 25 for a period of three years.
ITAT Kolkata held that interest payment on delayed deposit of income tax, whether TDS or otherwise is not an allowable expenditure.
ITAT Raipur held that cooperative society is entitled for claiming deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act in respect of dividend received on shares of cooperative banks.
ITAT Mumbai held that transfer pricing (TP) adjustment relating to intra-group services unjustified as assessee duly demonstrated objective analysis of intragroup services rendered and kind of qualitative and quantitative benefit.
CESTAT Chennai upholds the demand of concession availed vide customs notification on failure of appellant to maintain proper accountal of the receipt of imported goods till their utilization in the manufacture of the specified finished products.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash deposits unjustified as source of cash deposit successfully demonstrated by the assessee.
