Sunrise Biscuit Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Gauhati) VAT subsidy received by the Assessee – subsidy received for substantial expansion of the undertaking – subsidy is capital in nature – capital subsidy liable to be excluded from the computation of books profit Facts- The assessee has received subsidy of INR 8,78,84,902/- from the Industrial […]
Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Rajkot (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Appellant blended 5% ethanol with 95% motor spirit to form EBMS – such blending doesn’t amount to manufacture – final duty payable on EBMS. Facts- The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Motor spirit. The motor spirit is blended with Ethanol for the purpose of […]
Lite-on Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai) Facts- TPO in respect of procurement of management services determined NIL arm’s length price by holding that the assessee didn’t bring any evidence on record to suggest that it was in need for services for which it has paid to its AEs. Further, assessee has availed […]
We are of the considered view that the appellant has no business connection in India in respect of supply of GSM System by the appellant to cellular operators in India and further, there is no PE in any form in India in the captioned Assessment Years and therefore, the question of attribution of profit does not arise at all.
A.T. Mydeen and Another Vs Assistant Commissioner, Customs Department (Supreme Court of India) High Court fell into an error while passing a common judgement, based on evidence recorded in only one trial, against two sets of accused persons having been subjected to separate trials – matter remanded Facts- The main issue involved in the matter […]
Brief issue involved in the matter is that whether the credit on inputs and capital goods / services used in fabrication, erection, installation of towers and shelters is admissible or not. Further, issue also involves that whether extended period can be invoked in the present matter.
The appellant received patterns from their customers to whom they supply the casting manufactured using the patterns. In one of the order the total cost of pattern was amortized and accordingly the appellant did not took into consideration the value of pattern while clearing the additional order.
Accident benefit could have been claimed and availed of only if the accident had taken place subsequent to the renewal of the policy. The policy in the instant case was lying in a lapsed condition since 14th October, 2011 and, therefore, was not in force as on 06.03.2012, resultantly, the claim over Accident benefit was not payable to the respondent as per the conditions of the contract of insurance.
Vuppalapati Venkata Rama Rao Vs Directorate of Enforcement and another (Telangana High Court) Economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss needs to be viewed seriously – case not fit to grant anticipatory bail Facts- The Punjab National Bank has alleged that the company has availed various credit facilities from the consortium of banks […]
Transport Corpn. of India Ltd. Vs Employees State Insurance Corpn. (Supreme Court of India) Non-challenge of validity of Regulation 31-A confirms interest demand under the same Facts- The subject matter of the present dispute is demand made by the Employees State Insurance Corporation by way of contribution payable by the appellant for the period from […]
