ITAT Chennai held that since there was sufficient own funds to make investment/advances to its subsidiary, the interest disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) was not warranted. Accordingly, AO directed to delete the addition.
The new customs notification revises tariff value tables for oils, metals, and areca nuts, confirming no change in existing rates. It maintains consistency in import valuation under the Customs Act.
DGFT revises the unit of measurement for key import inputs in Metformin HCL production. The update clarifies UOM expression without altering prescribed input quantities.
The ruling found that bids were rejected on factors unrelated to Section 29A and absent from the process document. The takeaway is that liquidation sales must follow transparent, predefined conditions.
Delhi High Court held that successive Bail Application filed with no change in circumstances is liable to be dismissed. Further, bail application is dismissed since applicant has already been declared an offender.
Court held that exemption under Section 10(23BBA) applies only to bodies constituted under State enactments, not to temples or deities whose income is separately taxable. Temples must seek relief under Sections 11–12 instead.
Court held that dividend remains income of the shareholder and DDT is an additional income tax covered under Article 2, restricting India’s taxing rights to 10% under Article 11 of the India–UK DTAA.
ITAT Mumbai held that courses not having any approval or affiliation with any authority cannot be ground to hold that the purpose is not charitable. Accordingly, benefit of exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act granted since activity of imparting education within meaning of section 2(15).
Explains why Section 66 applications rarely succeed despite their power, highlighting systemic delays and gaps and outlining reforms needed to make accountability real.
The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the revocation of a customs broker licence for misdeclaring consignor details in diplomatic cargo. The ruling confirms findings of regulatory violations that facilitated gold smuggling.
