CESTAT Bangalore held that section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 allows amendment of a Bill of Entry after the clearance of the goods only on the basis of documentary evidences which were in existence at the time the goods were cleared for home consumption. In absence of the same, the amendment is unjustified.
Supreme Court held that a successful resolution applicant cannot be faced with undecided claims after the resolution plan has been accepted. Accordingly, claim filed after resolution plan accepted by CoC untenable.
ITAT Mumbai held that the amount of internal transfer between two EOUs of the assessee is to be considered for the purpose of arriving at the profit eligible for exemption under section 10B of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi held that initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of information from other officer without cogent and demonstrable material unjustified.
CESTAT Mumbai held that duty liability in terms of Chewing tobacco & Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2010 unsustainable merely alleging that sealed/uninstalled packing machine is available in the factory premises.
Kerala High Court held that under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act) in a contract for the transfer of the right to use the goods, the taxable event is the execution of the contract for delivery of the goods, and if that has taken place, it was immaterial whether the transfer was exclusively or to the exclusion of all others.
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.
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.
