Gauhati High Court held that betel nuts not being a notified item under section 123(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, the initial burden to show that the material seized is of foreign origin lies upon the revenue authority. Confiscation unsustained as revenue failed to discharge its initial burden.
NCLAT Delhi held that the NCLT has no jurisdiction to decide the validity or otherwise of the `Gift Deed’ more so when `fraud’ and `coercion’ is alleged.
CESTAT Delhi held that demand unsustainable as difference between value of goods shown in ER-1 returns and balance sheet duly explained with sufficient evidence.
Rajasthan High Court held that Pizza and Sandwich categorized as ‘Cooked Food’ are entitled for exemption of payment of VAT in excess of 5%.
CESTAT Chennai held that category of ‘Commercial Coaching or Training Services’ covers both theory classes and practical training classes. Demand under the said category for imparting computer coaching services confirmed.
ITAT Indore held that addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act towards gifts received from family members unsustainable as receiving gift from family members, namely father and mother for personal use, do not require any special occasion.
ITAT Bangalore held that the adjustment made by the TPO towards technical know-how fees despite accepting the entity level margins is liable to be deleted.
ITAT Pune held that change in method of accounting cannot partake character of concealment. Accordingly, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not leviable.
CESTAT Chennai held that tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) doesn’t apply to fees paid to foreign institutions for External Commercial borrowing as such financial institutions have permanent establishment in India.
ITAT Pune held that registration under section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act not granted as the agreement gives benefit of the persons covered u/s. 13(3) of the Act.
