Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment, in the exercise of powers under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act, without tangible material to conclude that income had escaped assessment is untenable in law.
CESTAT Chennai held that differential duty not payable as there is no contravention of Valuation Rules as an important part of the machine sold has been replaced with a less advanced component, slight reduction in the value of the machine sold is found to be normal.
CESTAT Chennai held that refund of duty paid under mistake of law cannot be denied when the refund claim is filed within the time prescribed under section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
Madras High Court held that order of assessment based on issuance of general notices calling for particulars is liable to be set aside.
Madras High Court held that exemption from payment of tax leviable under the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1974 is allowable on cars purchased by visually handicapped persons.
ITAT Delhi held that more specific plea and explanation ought to be given by an assessee for discharging burden u/s 69B of the Income Tax Act to explain jewelry beyond that mentioned in Wealth Tax Return.
ITAT Mumbai held that deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act is duly available to co-operative society on the interest income/dividend received/earned from deposits with the co-operative banks.
ITAT Visakhapatnam held that penalty u/s 271B of the Income Tax Act not imposable as provision of section 44AB of the Income Tax Act doesn’t apply to income that is treated as income from other sources.
ITAT Mumbai held that the assessee is eligible to claim exemption u/s. 54 of the Income Tax Act as the construction of residential house completed within three years from the relevant date.
Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the department is liable to make payment of interest after the expiry of three months from the date the refund of pre-deposit amount becomes due.
