This is regarding recent news reports by prominent sections of the media that appeared today that the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) has busted a deep rooted racket of supply of heroin and other contraband drugs which are likely to be facilitated by e-commerce company Flipkart.
Where additions have been deleted by Tribunal in quantum proceedings, penalty under section 271(1c) levied by AO not sustainable
DCIT Vs Shoreline Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) In these cases, the AO reopened the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, on the basis of information received from the DGIT (Inv.) Mumbai to the effect that during the previous year the assessee had obtained fake purchase bills from bogus parties who used to […]
IRDAI has received suggestions to allow designing a Combi product for Micro-insurance, an idea that serves the need for a comprehensive one-stop solution for the target groups. This may require amendments to extant legal framework as well as IRDAI Regulations.
To familiarize the candidates with the remote proctoring process, the Institute has decided to conduct a mock test for 2 hour’s duration on 3rd May 2022. Appearance in the mock test is compulsory in view of its importance and usefulness for the Candidates. It will be in the best interest of the Candidates.
The Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQ) as mentioned in Notification No. 22/2022-Customs dated 30th April 2022 under India–UAE CEPA and procedure for allocation and imports under given TRQs is notified.
State of Tamil Nadu Vs Everest Industries Limited (Madras High Court) It is useful to refer to the Judgment of the Apex Court in A. Venkata Subbarao v. State of A.P., (1965) 2 SCR 577 : AIR 1965 SC 1773 while dealing with the claims relating to tax that was illegally retained. In the above […]
In the context of Export Import Policy 2002-07 it was held that the policy could not have been retrospectively amended by the Government without there being any express power in this regard and that in any case the retrospective amendment of policy cannot take away vested rights of the exporters.
RSWM Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Excise and Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Admittedly, the dispute with regard to rebate totalling Rs.59,16,907 was sub judice before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court on the date of adjustment vide orders-in-original dated 28.01.2013. The said order is patently illegal and in violation of the instructions of […]
Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. Vs U.B. Engineering Ltd. (Supreme Court of India) The issue whether the learned Arbitrator could have awarded the interest on the interest of Rs. 2,27,58,137.08 from the date of award till realization and whether the same can be said to be interest on interest is now not res integra in view […]
