NCLAT Delhi held that restoration application rightly dismissed as personal guarantor was trying to abuse the process of law by misusing the moratorium available to him under section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
ITAT Jaipur held that seized cash belongs to the firm and not of the assessee alone and hence invoking provisions of section 69A of the Income Tax Act in the hands of assessee misconceived. Accordingly, addition is directed to be deleted.
CESTAT Chennai held that royalty payment not connected with the condition of sale is not includible in the assessable value. Hence, invocation of rule 10(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 not justified.
ITAT Delhi held that Bright Line Test doesn’t have statutory mandate and cannot be applied for determining Arm’s Length Price [ALP] of Advertisement, Marketing and Promotion [AMP] expense. Accordingly, appeal allowed to that extent.
The Appellants submitted that there were multiple violations of Section 30(2) of the Code, which prohibits the CoC from approving a plan that violates many laws and many provisions of the Code and Regulations.
ITAT Raipur held that addition of commission @1% on bogus sales transacted upheld as no plausible explanation provided by the assessee. Accordingly, appeal dismissed and order of CIT(A) upheld.
ITAT Pune held that delay of 02 seconds in filing income tax return [ITR] is to be condoned and return is to be treated as filed in time as delay was caused due to technical glitch and last hour rush in website. Accordingly, claim of carry forward business loss allowed.
CESTAT Chennai held that royalty fixed at percentage of net sales is not includible in transaction value of goods imported under rule 10(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 as royalty paid is not related to imported goods. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
NCLAT Delhi held that application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code rightly dismissed as debt fell within restricted period under section 10A. accordingly, order of Adjudicating Authority upheld.
Madras High Court held that that the essential parameters such as moisture and ash content were not tested properly for classification of roasted areca nuts. Accordingly, matter remitted back to Commissioner of Customs for fresh consideration.
