Follow Us:

Erroneous payment of duty on exempted goods would not render the goods dutiable

August 29, 2015 1057 Views 0 comment Print

The assessee Integral Coach Factory (ICF) belonging to the Central Government is engaged in the business of manufacturing passenger coaches both self-propelled and non-propelled, steel freight containers and parts of passenger coaches for railways under Chapter 86 of CET 1985.

CENVAT credit on capital goods used in the construction/erection of plant is allowed

August 29, 2015 2585 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of M/s.Thiru Arooran Sugars Vs. The Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hon’ble Madras High Court held that CENVAT credit on capital goods used in the erection of various capital goods, viz., M.S.Plates, M.S.Angles, M.S.Channels and H.R. Plates, which were purchased

‘Close up’ should be classified as dental cleaner, not toothpaste–SC

August 29, 2015 2778 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Commissioner Of Central Excise, Vapi Vs. M/s. Global Health Care Products , the Supreme Court held that ‘Close up’ should be classified as dental cleaner, not toothpaste on account of different

CENVAT credit of outdoor catering & outward transportation upto place of removal allowed

August 29, 2015 2231 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Vs. M/s. Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd., Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the CENVAT credit of the service tax paid in respect of cell phone services, catering services

Job work – Valuation under Excise

August 29, 2015 9846 Views 0 comment Print

A job work transaction triggers Excise Duty liability if the process involves manufacture. The consequent question that arises is how to determine assessable value of the goods involved. The various provisions that linger in one’s mind are Rule 10 A 0r Rule 8 or Rule 11 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000.

Why PRACTICE over Employment

August 29, 2015 2374 Views 0 comment Print

A small disclaimer before proceeding – this is my first write up and I hope you rate me on same basis. Before reasoning why I prefer Practice over the other, I would like to confess straight away that none of them is superior over the other. Choose what you would like be in future, choose where you want to see yourself some years down the line, whether as a CEO/CFO/the likes or a successful entrepreneur of something of your own.

Intention of letting out property is to be seen for section 23(1)(c)

August 29, 2015 8586 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Mumbai held in case of ACIT vs. Suryashankar Properties Limited that Intention of letting out the property is to be seen for invoking clause (c) of section 23(1) for computing the annual letting value of the property and it is irrelevant whether the property is/was let out.

No Penalty u/s 271FB if Assessee has no malafide intentions

August 29, 2015 1727 Views 0 comment Print

In the case M/s. Ashok Trading Co. Vs. ITO the Hon’ble Kolkata ITAT held that as per sub-section (2) of 115WD, if the assessee had not filed the return of Fringe Benefit but in the opinion of the AO he should have filed the return

Materials collected & Statements recorded during Survey u/s 133A are not conclusive evidences

August 29, 2015 2234 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Pankaj Plastic Industries Vs. ITO the Hon’ble Kolkata ITAT held that The materials found in the course of survey would not be the basis for making any addition in the assessment. The word “may” used in section 133A (3)(iii) of the Act makes it clear that the materials collected

Acceptance of Deposits by Companies under Companies Act, 2013

August 29, 2015 56233 Views 15 comments Print

Overview of dealing sections, provisions & rules – Chapter V of Companies Act, 2013, Section 73 to 76 of Companies Act, 2013, Companies ( Acceptance of Deposits ) Rule, 2014, Companies ( Acceptance of Deposits ) Amendment Rule, 2015, MCA general circular No. 09/2015

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930