CESTAT Delhi held that imported goods being water meters and not flow meters are correctly classifiable under Customs Tariff Item 9028 2000 and not under 9026 1010. Accordingly, duty demand confirmed.
ITAT Indore held that the order under section 127 of the Income Tax Act made out by authorities, without serving notice upon assessee, would be invalid and inoperative. Accordingly, action undertaken by AO u/s. 147/148 will also be illegal.
CESTAT Delhi held that microphones and receivers imported into India for manufacture of PCBA of cellular mobile phones is eligible for exemption from payment of customs duty under Exemption notification no. 57/2017-Customs dated 30.06.2017 prior to 06.07.2019.
Karnataka High Court held that works contract entered with State and other Government agencies needs to calculate works executed Pre-GST under KVAT regime and Post-GST. Thus, reimbursement/ refund is to be granted for differential tax liability taking into account Pre-GST and Post-GST tax liability.
ITAT Bangalore held that assets received for testing purpose and there is no specific benefit that arises to the assessee with respect to usage of those assets, the same is not taxable under section 28(iv) of the Income tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition based on ad hoc method not justifiable since assessee followed Percentage of Completion Method for revenue recognition adhering to guidance note on Accounting of Real Estate Transactions issued by ICAI. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
NCLT Kochi held that proposed reduction of paid-up capital is justified on commercial grounds, duly approved by the shareholders, and does not adversely affect any creditors, employees, or other stakeholders. The reduction is proportionate and lawful u/s. 66 of the Companies Act, 2013.
ITAT Delhi held that the assessee is eligible for entire credit of foreign taxes, even if the taxability was nil consequent to the deduction on account of business losses or section 10A exemption. Accordingly, appeal is allowed.
ITAT Jaipur held that Urban Improvement Trust is a “State” within the meaning of Article 289(1) of the Constitution of India being an instrumentality of State within the meaning thereof. Hence, income is not chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act.
Bombay High Court held that full set-off not admissible under Rule 41D of the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, set-off available after reducing 6% of purchase price under Rule 41D(3)(a), on furnace oil used in manufacture of goods partly sold locally and partly transferred to branches outside the State.
