CESTAT Kolkata held that penalty u/s. 114 of the Customs Act imposable on customs broker and intermediary with regard to non-compliance of their duty of fulfilling KYC requirement. Accordingly, penalty reduced to INR 4 Lakhs.
Madras High Court held that matter of mismatch of ITC between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 remanded back for fresh consideration since non-appearance on the part of the assessee was due to the fact that accountant was not doing well.
ITAT Chennai held that approval of large number of cases in a single day cannot be reason for faulting reopening of assessment since the case was reopened u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act after due application of mind.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that price cannot be enhanced merely on the basis of DGOV circular unless until some strong material is found to support the price which was fetched from DGOV circular. Matter remitted to the Assessing Authority.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that PCIT has taken divergent view from that of AO without giving the basis for invoking of provisions of section 263 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order passed by PCIT u/s. 263 not justifiable.
ITAT Chennai held that salary received for international assignment which is subjected to tax in UK could not be taxed in India. Accordingly, claim of the assessee allowed. The assessee being non-resident individual filed return of income declaring income of Rs.2295/- and claiming refund of Rs.10.08 Lacs.
The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture of paper, paperboard in India with focus on recycled grades and specializes in the manufacture of duplex boards, kraft paper, writing and printing papers.
As per the AO, the impugned payment in cash exceeding the specified limit was not allowable as deduction and accordingly the AO disallowed the same under the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee.
In the impugned order it has been held that supply of free power is nothing but “consideration” towards licensing services rendered by the State Governments. The correctness of this view is assailed in the Writ Petition.
AO proceeded to finalize the assessment based on available records, as the assessee had still not responded or provided any explanations regarding the unexplained cash deposits. AO added the unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 3,13,34,845/- to the total income.
