NCLT Mumbai while dealing with Company Petition filed u/s. 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 held that debts arising from different work order(s) can be clubbed to satisfy the minimum threshold limit.
CESTAT Delhi held that exemption benefit of Central Excise Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 not available as new conditions amended vide Notification No. 34/2015-CE dated 17.7.2015 not satisfied.
CESTAT Delhi held that simply because a suspicion has arisen in a particular case it is not sufficient ground to suspend the licence of the customs broker who handled such imports/exports.
ITAT Hyderabad held that reasons given in the condonation application for the delay are not sufficient for condonation of such huge delay of 930 days. Accordingly, appeal dismissed as barred by limitation.
ITAT Raipur held that matter needs to be restored in absence of necessary verification by AO in characterizing share application money as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 and non-cooperation and evasive conduct of the assessee.
CESTAT Chennai held that merely because some parts were imported separately and cleared under a separate Bill of Entry (BOE), the department cannot contend that the goods cannot be classified under CTH 8437. Goods classifiable under CTH 8437 as order placed for supply would be complete only by including the goods imported vide both Bills of Entry.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that imports of Motor Spirit/ High Speed Diesel is assessable on actual receipt in shore tank and not transaction value based on invoice price of overseas supplier.
ITAT Jaipur held that as per records i.e. the Govt. Gazette Notification and Office Order submitted, Malviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur (Raj) is a Govt. Organisation and therefore assessee being an employee of Government Organization is entitled for full exemption of earned leave encashment on retirement u/s 10(10AA) of Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that re-opening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act on account of mere change of opinion is bad-in-law and liable to be quashed.
NCLT Hyderabad held that condonation of delay in filing the claim without indicating any sufficient reasons not acceptable as length of the delay is immaterial, but the reasons for condonation of delay matters.
