Held that para 2 of Circular 35/2017-Cus is clearly contrary to Section 110 A and is, consequently, void and unenforceable at law. It is not permissible for the CBEC, by executive fiat, to incorporate limitations, on provisional release of seized goods, which find no place in the parent statutory provision, i.e. Section 110 A of the Act.
Held that the information that does not touch upon any of the sensitive and confidential activities undertaken by the Vigilance Department, cannot be withheld.
Shares are financial assets classified as tangible assets because they derive value from contractual claims. Hence, the same is not depreciable u/s 32 (1) (ii) of The Act.
Criminal proceedings justified on account of wilful and deliberate concealment of true and correct income by not filing the return of income within the time stipulated
Held that the period of limitation prescribed under Section 153 (2A) or 153 (3) is applicable, when the matters are remanded back irrespective of whether it is to the Assessing Officer or TPO or the DRP, the duty is on the assessing officer to pass orders.
Held that agreement would not be discharged by death of the party thereto and will be enforceable by or against the heirs of the deceased. Accordingly, present arbitration application allowed.
Held that mere extraordinary profit cannot be criteria for adjustment in the transfer price
Provisions of section 34 restricts the scope of interference with the arbitral award on the ground of public policy. Present arbitral award doesn’t contradict public policy hence interference unjustified.
Held that a person carrying on a business through a branch or agency in any country shall be treated as having a business establishment in that country and such establishment situated abroad as a separate person.
Disallowance on delay in payment toward employee’s contribution to PF u/s 36(1)(va) via u/s 143(1) deleted in absence of adequate intimation to the assessee.
