CESTAT Chandigarh held that Multi System Operator (MSO) is liable to pay service tax only on the gross amount received by them from Local Cable Operators (LCOs)
ITAT Bangalore held that invocation of provisions of section 263 justifiable as AO failed to reconcile the claim of long term capital gain exemption with the amounts furnished in Form 10DB
ITAT Delhi held that processing fees for purchase of business assets is allowable as deduction as the loan has been taken for purchase of assets which are used for the business of the assessee.
ITAT Chennai held that claim of depreciation and other related expenses is allowed to the company as the cars, registered in the name of directors, are used for the purpose of business.
ITAT Delhi held that AO duly accepted foreign exchange gain offered to taxation in earlier Assessment Year, hence AO cannot disallow foreign exchange loss assuming it to be a contingent loss in the year under consideration.
Madras High Court held that as the Appellate Tribunal is the ultimate fact finding authority, it is incumbent on the part of the Appellate Tribunal to examine the claim on the basis of additional documents/ evidences. Accordingly, matter remanded back to Appellate Tribunal to re-examine the issue.
Gujarat High Court held that the expression or word sufficient cause’ occurring in section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963, cannot be construed in a static form. Delay in filing of an appeal on account of rectification application and Lockdown duly condoned.
NCLT Mumbai approved the resolution plan submitted by AM Mining India Pvt. Ltd. for Uttam Galva Steel Limited as the same is not contrary to provisions of section 29A of IBC Code and is in accordance with law
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that where during the provision of Authorized Service Station Services, the spare parts and lubricants sold and VAT thereupon was paid the value of such spare parts and lubricants would not attract Service Tax.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that exercising revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act for not dealing with alternative claim and claiming the order of AO as prejudicial to the interest of revenue is not sustainable as anyhow deduction was available to the assessee.
