ITAT Mumbai held that Retail Sale Price Method (RPM) is the most appropriate method for benchmarking the international transaction of ‘import of men’s wear for resale’ between Celio Future Fashion Pvt. Ltd. and its associated enterprises.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the complainant miserably failed to prove the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 against the respondent/accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal dismissed.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Cenvat Credit of duty paid on inputs used in manufacture of final products cleared without payment of duty and which is further utilized for manufacture of final products on which duty is paid is allowable.
ITAT Delhi held that rejection of valuation merely on the ground that on the date of issue of shares, DCF method was not there in Rule 11UA of the ITAT Rules is unjustified in as much as AO failed to demonstrate that methodology adopted by the assessee was not correct.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that in case of production of a new retail sale price, duty is to be calculated on pro-rata basis, in the present case only four days, when the production has taken place.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that in case of production of a new retail sale price, duty is to be calculated on pro-rata basis, in the present case only four days, when the production has taken place.
CESTAT Kolkata held that the charges paid for services rendered by the FTOs (i.e. Foreign Telecommunication Operators) cannot be taxed under head ‘telecommunication services’. Accordingly, demand set aside.
ITAT Delhi held that maintenance charges received from corporate members is exempt on principle of mutuality. The said receipt doesn’t become taxable merely because it was subjected to deduction of tax at source.
Gujarat High Court held that the role of the applicant’s firm in Gujarat State Land Development Corporation (GSLDC Scam) was very limited and was not actually connected with the field work and only to the extent the audit of vouchers and records.
ITAT Kolkata held that exemption under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act not eligible in respect of long Term Capital Gain from sale of equity shares of penny stock companies listed with Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE).
