ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition towards unexplained expenditure unsustainable as impugned amount has already been surrendered by the firm and accepted by the Settlement Commission.
CESTAT Delhi held that mere acceptance of the reassessed value and payment thereof will not be sufficient to confirm the allegations of undervaluation. Burden on the department to prove mis-declaration and undervaluation not discharged. Hence, differential duty demand set aside.
CESTAT Kolkata held that revocation of customs broker licence for violation of post import condition of the exemption notification by the importer unsustainable as customs broker has a limited role of filing bill of entry and at no stretch of imagination can be held liable for violation of post import condition.
CESTAT Chennai held that coverage of activity of Postweld heat treatment/ stress relief heat treatment as within the definition of ‘Technical Testing and Analysis Service’ needs re-consideration as appellant doesn’t issue any report certifying quality of goods.
ITAT Raipur held that revisionary proceedings cannot be termed as illegal or not maintainable when the assessee have not responded and remain non-compliant in explaining his case before the PCIT.
ITAT Delhi held that invocation of revisionary power u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act unjustified when AO has exercised its quasi-judicial powers and arrived at a conclusion with reasonable application of mind.
ITAT Indore held that the credit of the tax collected at source should be given to the person in whose hands the income is rightfully and finally assessed to tax in accordance with law, irrespective of the person in whose hands the TDS/TCS certificate has been issued at first place.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that restriction of CENVAT Credit on supplementary invoice is applicable only in case of sale of goods. In the present case, restriction of CENVAT Credit on supplementary invoice is not applicable as there is only a stock transfer.
ITAT Visakhapatnam held that addition towards unexplained labour credits sustained as assessee failed to discharge the onus casted on it and failed to produce material evidence with respect to labour payments and material payments.
Delhi High Court held that the department after issuance of summons couldn’t arrest the respondent/accused unless warrants were issued by the Special Court on requisite grounds. The exercise of power of arrest by the department was totally unjustifiable. Accordingly, bail granted.
