CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Parts of Drier/ parboiling parts namely Heat Exchanges, Drier Fan and Aluminium Fin Tubes are classifiable under Chapter Heading 8437 and attracted NIL rate till Circular No. 924/14/2010-CX dated 19.05.2010 got rescinded.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that goods imported are classifiable under tariff heading 27101290 which are allowed to be imported only through State Trading Enterprises (STE), as per the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) condition 5 of chapter 27. Redemption fine and penalty justified as condition of the policy for importing goods not satisfied.
ITAT Mumbai held that since service charges collected from the tenant was accepted as ‘income from business, any expenses incurred thereof is allowable as business expense.
ITAT Ahmedabad restored the issue to the file of CIT(E) and directed to give another opportunity of being heard to the appellant in support of his case for registration of Trust u/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act and also directed appellant to furnish requisite documents in the matter.
CESTAT Chennai held that a building or its part put up on land and which is used for car parking will get the benefit of the exclusion from levy of Service Tax under Section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, refund claim allowed.
Bombay High Court held that validity of circular no. 80/10/2004-ST dated 17 September 2004 cannot be examined vide the present petition as the same is already subject matter of contention in the show cause notice issued to one of the petitioner’s member M/s. Transocean Offshore International Ventures Ltd. and hence designated officer will adjudicate the same.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty notice under section 271(1)(c) without specifying the limb is vague and ambiguous, accordingly, penalty proceedings not sustainable.
NCLAT Delhi held that claim of the appellant, to Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) during the process of CIRP, duly rejected as the claim was based on MOU/ agreement which were forged document.
ITAT Delhi held that the income from technical handling services received from ‘International Airlines Technical Pool (IATP) members is not taxable in India as it is covered under Article 8(2) r.w. Article 8(1) of India-France DTAA.
ITAT Delhi held that the receipts from sale of software licenses are not in the nature of royalty income. Also held that, though, such income may be in the nature of business profit, however, no part of which can be attributed to the PE in India.
