ITAT Delhi held that provisions of section 68 of the Income Tax Act cannot be applied in relation to the cash sales receipt shown by the assessee in its books of accounts.
CESTAT Kolkata held that duty demand on supply of transmission line accessories and hardware fittings unsustainable as the same is only supply and not manufacture. Further, revenue couldn’t adduce any evidence of clandestine manufacture.
ITAT Jaipur held that capital gain not computable in respect of sale deed executed in favour of daughter-in law as it is only a gift to close relative and not a sale.
ITAT Pune held that onus of proving the genuineness of transaction of receipt of donation not discharged. Accordingly, held that all cash donation transactions are sham, a make believe story, a device adopted created to sleeve undisclosed income through anonymous donations.
Bombay High Court held that as per clause (xiii) of section 144B(1), reply can be filed by the assessee on the date and time as specified or within the extended time. Accordingly, shutting down the window before completion of extended time limit is unjustified. Hence, assessment order liable to be quashed.
CESTAT Chandigarh held that know-how is not an Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) within the meaning of service tax law and consequently its transfer is not liable to service tax.
CESTAT Delhi held that the Ranger (non-electric) Vehicles deserve to be classified under CTH 8704 and Ranger (electric) and Brutus Vehicles deserve to be classified under CTH 8709.
ITAT Chennai held that there is no obligation to deduct tax at source u/s 195 of the Income Tax Act as payment made to sister concern in USA is purely reimbursement of expense and does not involve any element of income.
CESTAT Delhi held that order passed by Commissioner (A) is without jurisdiction as the appeal is filed by the department before the Commissioner (A) against an order the correctness of which stood decided against the department by the Delhi High Court.
CESTAT Mumbai held that coaching in the field of sports has been specifically excluded from the applicability of service tax vide the definition of commercial training or coaching centre under section 65(27) of the Finance Act 1994
