ITAT Rajkot held that there is no escapement of income or loss of revenue since tax paid on the basis of consolidated profit of both the partnership firm and hence reassessment proceedings are not sustainable. Accordingly, appeal of revenue is dismissed.
CESTAT Allahabad held that finding recorded by Commissioner (A) in earlier round of litigation have attained finality. Accordingly, the attempt to re-agitate the same issue in subsequent proceedings is barred by principles of Res Judicata. Accordingly, appeal of department dismissed.
Karnataka High Court held that customs duty under the exemption Notification No.1/95-CE dated 04.01.1995 on imported items not granted since condition of value addition at the minimum rate of 33% made before the exports not satisfied. In fact, the value addition was only upto 5.18%.
NCLT Mumbai held that since existence of financial debt and default thereon is established, application filed under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiation of Corporate Insolvency and Resolution Process [CIRP] against Proto D Industries Pvt. Ltd. [Corporate Debtor] is admitted.
Orissa High Court held that post grant of refund by Assistant Commissioner, the recourse to adjudicate upon the same objection/content under Section 73 without giving due deference to the quasi judicial Appellate Order is unconscionable. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.
Karnataka High Court held that in terms of auction memorandum, liquidator appointed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, was empowered to forfeit the Earnest Money Deposit [EMD] and Interest free Refundable Participation Deposit Money [PDM] deposited for participating in the auction.
CESTAT Allahabad held that extended period of limitation is not invocable since alleged inadmissible cenvat credit was duly reflected in the return. Accordingly, demand beyond normal period of limitation set aside.
Madras High Court held that in terms of provisions of section 32A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 no action shall be taken against the property of the corporate debtor in relation to an offence committed prior to the commencement of the CIRP.
Kerala High Court held that levy of penalty on the basis of statement recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act is not sustainable since provisions of section 138B have not been complied with. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed.
Patna High Court allowed the writ and held that liquor manufacturer is permitted to payment for unsold stock which is destroyed on implementation of Bihar Government Prohibition policy effected in 2016. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed.
