NCLAT Delhi held that once moratorium is declared, suspended management is also strictly prohibited from directly or indirectly deploying the funds of the Corporate Debtor unilaterally, without the authorisation of IRP, to clear any dues of any Financial Creditor or Operational Creditor.
CESTAT Kolkata held that recovery of cenvat credit alleging receipt of only paper invoice without actual receipt of inputs is not tenable due to incomplete investigation carried out on the part of the department. Also held that recovery is not sustainable since vendor is not made co-noticee.
Delhi High Court held that concluded and closed assessments cannot be reopened merely on suspicion. Accordingly, reopening of assessment is liable to be quashed since there is no tangible material that has a live nexus to reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment.
Karnataka High Court held that service of software development to overseas service recipients are that of an independent service provider which qualify as export of services under the service tax provisions and 2(6) of the IGST Act. Accordingly, refund granted and petition allowed.
CESTAT Delhi held that bank charges paid to foreign bank is not taxable in India under Reverse Charge Mechanism as the said services has been provided outside the taxable territory and hence outside the purview of section 66B for levy of service tax.
ITAT Mumbai held that in the present case there is a surrender of tenancy rights against which a new flat has been allotted. Thus, deduction u/s. 54F admissible against the capital gain so computed on surrender of tenancy right.
Kerala High Court held that the vessel under the South East Asia and Indian Ocean Cable Maintenance Agreement [SEAIOCM Agreement], the vessel can be categorized as a foreign going vessel and hence entitled for exemption u/s. 87 of the Customs Act. Accordingly, writ by revenue dismissed.
Madras High Court held that main object of the Charitable Trust being microfinance is not eligible which is not charitable in nature cannot claim the benefit of exemption either under Section 11(1) or under Section 11(4A) of the Income Tax Act.
The petitioner is a registered dealer under the GST Act, dealing with milk and milk products. As part of its business, the petitioner processes and sells, flavoured milk, to customers within and outside the State of Andhra Pradesh.
Madras High Court held that period of limitation for issuing notice under section 153C of the Income Tax Act to person other than searched person shall be date of receiving books of accounts or documents seized by AO having jurisdiction over such other person.
