CESTAT Delhi held that lending of IEC Code is not an offence under the Customs Act. Accordingly, penalty under section 114AA of the Customs Act imposed for the same is not sustainable and liable to be set aside.
ITAT Bangalore held that order rejecting application for approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act passed by CIT(E) under incorrect name has resulted into confusion and procedural irregularity. Hence, matter remanded for fresh adjudication.
CESTAT Chennai held that that the PVC Regrind is a single thermoplastic material and cannot be classified as waste/scrap. Thus, import of PVC Regrind is not restricted under Foreign Trade Policy.
NCLAT Delhi held that debt and default on the part of Corporate Debtor proved and hence application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code duly admissible. Thus, appeal dismissed and order of adjudicating authority upheld.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act not justified as genuineness and identity of shareholders proved. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed and CIT(A) upheld.
Madras High Court held that search conducted by Directorate of Enforcement at Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd [TASMAC] under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is lawful and cannot be termed as harassment.
ITAT Mumbai held that the addition in respect of bogus purchases is to be limited to the extent of bringing the gross profit rate on such purchases at the same rate as of other genuine purchases. Accordingly, matter restored to file of AO with direction to restrict addition.
This court is required to draw a balance between the right of the petitioner to travel abroad and also the right of the prosecution to duly prosecute the petitioner so as to prevent him from evading the trial.
Kerala High Court held that section 245C doesn’t prescribed any prior cut-off date for filing settlement application. Unadjudicated notice u/s. 153A/ 153C as on the date of application is the only requirement.
Telangana High Court held that granting registration under section 12A retrospectively is not permissible as cogent reasons not provided for belated filing of application for registration under section 12A. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
