Madras High Court modified conditions for provisional release of PVC Coated Fabric [goods involved in misclassified and undervalued] and directed payment of duty; payment of 50% of differential duty and execution of bond for specified amount.
ITAT Delhi held that provision of section 54F of the Income Tax Act are beneficial provision and the same has to be applied as per the peculiar situation of each case. Here, exemption u/s. 54F granted in spite of delay in construction of residential property since it was beyond the control of the assessee.
Supreme Court held that the Successful Resolution Applicant [SRA] cannot be forced to deal with claims that are not a part of the Request for Resolution Plan [RfRP] issued in terms of Section 25 of the IBC or a part of its Resolution Plan.
ITAT Chennai held that interest received on enhanced compensation forms part of the compensation and hence entitled for exemption under section 10(37) of the Income Tax Act and accordingly, not taxable. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed.
Madras High Court held that AO based on seized records and statement of dealer was justified in assessing the suppressed turnover. Accordingly, order of Assistant Commissioner and Tribunal set aside and addition upheld.
Delhi High Court held that Petitioner was clearly hand-in-glove with M/s. Balaji [non-existing supplier] and has enabled loss to the exchequer by fraudulently availing ITC without actual supply of goods or services. Accordingly, writ dismissed and order blocking of ITC in electronic cash ledger upheld.
ITAT Delhi held that addition towards undisclosed source of income cannot be sustained merely because this amount is not reported in Tax Audit Report since transaction is duly recorded in books of accounts.
Delhi High Court held that retention of seized property without adhering to section 20 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] is contrary to statutory framework and accordingly unsustainable in law. Hence, present appeal is allowed and order set aside.
Delhi High Court held that in terms of section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944 when issues of determining taxability or valuation are involved, the appeal would lie to the Supreme Court. Accordingly, appeals are disposed of.
Madras High Court held that freight charges are directly related to the delivery of goods and therefore form an inseparable part of the sale consideration. Thus, freight charges form part of the sale price and are taxable under the Sales Tax Act.
