CESTAT Chennai held that the demand of duty in respect of semifinished goods cannot sustain. Accordingly, the duty paid thereon is duly refundable.
ITAT Kolkata held that filing of Form 67 is directory in nature. Accordingly, benefit of relief of withholding tax credit in Tanzania against the tax liability arising in India allowed.
ITAT Delhi held that royalty payment and R&D cess on royalty is interlinked. As royalty payment is allowed as revenue expenditure, R&D cess is also allowable as revenue expenditure.
ITAT Jaipur held that capital gain on sale of land as covered under the provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act is to be assessed separately.
Calcutta High Court held that for earlier assessment years already tax in respect of sale of shares was treated and accepted as long term capital gains. Thus, when the shares were held to be investments and accepted as earlier AYs, it cannot be said to be not an investment in the current AY. Accordingly, profit taxable as capital gains and not business income.
ITAT Delhi held that addition is made on the basis of documents found from the separate search at another person. Accordingly, assessment should have been done under section 153C of the Income Tax Act and not under section 153A of the Income Tax Act.
NCLAT Chennai held that National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) is not proper Fora to determine the controversies revolving around the attachment of property under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.
ITAT Jaipur held that revenue has simply disallowed the expenditure in view of CBDT Circular no. 05/2012 dated 01.08.2012 without establishing the violation thereof. Accordingly, disallowance merely on presumption and assumption is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Kolkata held that addition towards share capital and share premium under section 68 of the Income Tax Act untenable as assessee discharged its onus to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the share subscribing companies and the genuineness of the transactions.
ITAT Delhi held that revisional power under section 263 of the Income Tax Act not invocable in case of inadequate inquiry, in fact, revisional power is invocable only in case of lack of inquiry.
