ITAT Amritsar held that high seas sale transaction cannot be treated as speculative transaction as entire transaction is going through by proper delivery of the goods during purchase and the documents are provided for evidence of delivery of goods.
Karnataka High Court set aside the endorsement and directed the authority to reconsider the application under Karasamadhana Scheme
CESTAT Chennai held that total CENVAT credit for the purpose of formula under Rule 6 (3A) is only the total cenvat credit on common input services and will not include CENVAT credit on input / input services exclusively used for the manufacture of dutiable goods.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that certificate issued by qualified professionals like Cost Accountants cannot be brushed aside merely with the statement that corroborative evidence was not produced. Such certificates are needed to be accepted by the department unless investigation is undertaken in doubtful cases.
CESTAT Chennai held that license fee are accruing to appellants is based on the turnover and profits of the hotel business. Accordingly, such transaction cannot be one of ‘renting of immovable property’ as the consideration is not like a regular rent but is dependent on the annual performance and profits of the hotel.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that in the proceedings under section 153A of the Act, the assessment can only be made based on incriminating materials found/ collected during the search from the premises of the assessee. Addition unsustainable no material of incriminating nature was found from the premises of the assessee.
NCLAT Chennai held that as the Application for MSME certificate was made after the commencement of CIRP, such unauthorized Application cannot be considered and cannot tide over ineligibility under Section 29-A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
ITAT Jaipur held that referring impugned domestic transaction to TPO u/s 92CA is invalid in view of omission of clause (i) of section 92BA vide Finance Act, 2017.
Delhi High Court held that it cannot be said that the notices issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act had no basis for triggering an enquiry, and therefore, were invalid. Accordingly, review petition dismissed.
ITAT Delhi held that registration u/s 12AA to trust created for managing the statutory obligations of employees of the parent trust is granted as the same falls within the ambit of advancement of general public utility and, hence, to be considered as a charitable activity as defined u/s 2(15) of the Act.
