The authority rejected the argument that interlocking wall panels are structural building components. It ruled that decorative PVC panels lack load-bearing function and remain classifiable as sheets under heading 3921.
The dispute involved taxing unexplained increases in partners capital in the firms assessment. The Tribunal affirmed that such additions, if any, can only be examined in the hands of partners and not the partnership firm.
CESTAT Chennai held that Actuator Assy. Clutch and Tube Connector Assy. Clutch being accessory of clutch and gear shifting mechanism are rightly classifiable under the residual entry of 8708 9900 and not under 8708 9300. Accordingly, appeal of department rejected.
The case addressed whether exemption could be disallowed through prima facie adjustment under section 143(1). The Tribunal held such denial impermissible and ordered fresh consideration.
The ruling holds that decorative PVC, PU and PS wall panels retain their character as plastic sheets under CTH 3921. Classification as builders’ ware under CTH 3925 was rejected due to lack of structural function.
An application seeking classification clarity was withdrawn after confirmation that customs proceedings on the same issue were underway. The ruling reiterates the procedural bar on advance rulings in such cases.
Karnataka High Court held that blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger by invoking Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules [CGST Rules] without providing pre-decisional hearing and without providing reasons to believe is not justifiable and hence order is liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal examined whether cost of acquisition could be fixed on assumptions. It held that government-notified MVR rates must be considered and ad-hoc estimates cannot replace statutory valuation methods.
ITAT Hyderabad held that limitation for issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act would be only 3 years from the end of the assessment year since material suggesting escapement is less than Rs. 50 Lakhs. Hence, notice issued u/s. 148 is beyond period of limitation of three years hence quashed.
Delhi High Court held that employee’s contribution deposited after statutory due date under relevant Acts is disallowed under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act even if the same is paid before filing of income tax return. Accordingly, question is decided against appellant.
