The Gujarat High Court held that exporters may apply for RoDTEP benefits even if the claim was not mentioned in the shipping bills. It directed that such omission should not be treated as a waiver or result in rejection of the claim.
The Gujarat High Court held that exporters who exported sugar with the prescribed permission of the Directorate of Sugar were entitled to RoDTEP benefits. It directed the authorities to grant the rebate despite the export policy being classified as restricted.
The Gujarat High Court held that the Tribunal rightly deleted the addition after finding that the Assessing Officer had not verified the assessees claim. It ruled that no substantial question of law arose and dismissed the Revenues appeal.
The ITAT Delhi held that deduction of TDS by the payer does not by itself establish that income has accrued to the recipient. It ruled that income must be recognised based on the assessees accounting method and completion of services.
The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunals order, holding that acceptance of the assessees explanation on reconciliation of professional receipts did not raise any substantial question of law.
The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunals order, holding that acceptance of the assessees explanation on reconciliation of professional receipts did not raise any substantial question of law.
The ITAT Mumbai held that additions based solely on AIR information were unsustainable when the assessee had disclosed professional receipts higher than those reflected in the AIR and no contrary evidence was produced.
The ITAT Mumbai held that transfer pricing adjustments for intra-group services were unsustainable because the TPO determined the arms length price without applying any prescribed method under Section 92C. It directed deletion of the adjustments on this technical ground.
The ITAT Ahmedabad held that the assessee had discharged its burden under Section 68 by producing confirmations, PAN, bank statements and income-tax records. The Revenue’s additions were deleted as no contrary evidence was produced.
The Jharkhand High Court held that a marriage marked by 36 years of separation had become a “dead wood marriage,” justifying dissolution. It also enhanced the wife’s permanent alimony from ₹10 lakh to ₹40 lakh.
