CESTAT Chennai held that Zinc EDTA being used as fertilizers are classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 3105 and not under Customs Tariff Heading 2922 4990 as held in impugned order. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act as unexplained money towards bogus long term capital gains not sustained since assessee has proved the genuineness of transactions of purchase and sale of shares as ordinary investor.
Karnataka High Court held that demand of service tax on ocean freight on import services is liable to be quashed since the petitioner are not the recipient of service for the purpose of notification no. 3/2017-ST dated 12.01.2017.
CESTAT Kolkata held that knitted readymade garments are classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 6102 and, accordingly, the drawback rate would be 10% of FOB value. Accordingly, the appeal filed by appellant is disposed of.
CESTAT Kolkata held that the device i.e. Face Recognition System is clearly Automatic Data Processing machinery falling under Customs Tariff Heading [CTH] 8471 only and not under CTH 8543. Accordingly, appeals are allowed.
Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act issued much after the surviving period is barred by limitation. Accordingly, notices are set aside and petition is allowed.
Madras High Court held that Income Tax Appellate Tribunal cannot review its earlier order under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act. Notably jurisdiction of Tribunal is restricted only to rectify error and not review.
Karnataka High Court held that Society controlled by the State Government and funded by State Government covered within definition of clause (zfa) i.e. within ‘Government Entity’ as covered vide notification 32/2017 dated 13.10.2017 and hence exempted from GST tax liability.
ITAT Cochin held that since loans and advances are denominated in foreign currency, LIBOR Rates would be more suitable for benchmarking. Accordingly, AO directed to benchmark the international transaction of loan/advances to Associated Enterprise using applicable LIBOR Rate.
ITAT Indore held that delay of 560 days in filing of an appeal before CIT(A) rightly not condoned as assessee has failed to give satisfactory and bonafide explanation. Accordingly, delay not condoned as no sufficient cause shown.
