Vishnunarayan R. Modani Vs CIT (A) (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee has not furnished any material to show that the share transactions entered by him are genuine transactions. Accordingly, I am of the view that the Assessing Officer was justified in treating the capital gain of Rs.136,812/- and Rs.150,575/- as income under the head ‘income from other […]
DGFT Public Notice No. 6/2015-2020 dated 14.06.2021 is withdrawn. In pursuance of Gazette Notification No. S.O. 3515 (E) dated 29.07.2022 regarding addition of ‘cashew nuts and its products’ to the First Schedule to the APEDA Act, 1985 (2 of 1986), APEDA is designated as the agency authorized to issue RCMCs for Cashew Kernels, Cashewnut Shell […]
In re RET-Tech Private Limited (CAAR Mumbai) M/s. RET-Tech Private Limited (the applicant, in short) filed an application before the Customs Authority for Advance Ruling, Mumbai (CAAR, in short) seeking advance rulings on the classification of the devices namely handheld enterprise mobile computers, having the following models: – Table-1 SI.No. Model Product is with / […]
In re Nokia Solutions and Networks India Private Limited (CAAR Mumbai) CAAR held that the Nokia 7210 SAS products are classifiable under subheading 85176290 as routers and are eligible to avail the benefit under Sr. No. 13N of Notification No. 24/2005-Customs, as amended. FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF CUSTOMS AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, MUMBAI […]
In re PN Trade and Services (CAAR Mumbai) An intelligent flight battery is a lithium-ion rechargeable and removable battery to power a drone. As per HSN explanatory notes to heading 8507, these batteries. also known as electric accumulators, are characterised by the fact that the electrochemical action is reversible so that the accumulator may be […]
In re BASF India Limited (CAAR Mumbai) The question raised in the applicant’s application for Advance Ruling was whether the said Vitamin Premixes were classifiable under Heading 23.09 or under Heading 29.36. The said question raised in the applicant’s application is the same as in number of matters decided by the Appellate Tribunal and Courts, […]
PCIT Vs IFFCO LTD (Delhi High Court) In view of Section 14A(1), no deduction is to be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the As per Section 2(45) of the Act, ‘total income’ means the total amount of […]
Advance Computer Education Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The appellant also raised a point that they are eligible for exemption on the vocational training service. In this regard we find that Computer Education service has been excluded from the Vocational Training service by Notification No. 19/2005-ST dated 07.06.2005. In this case […]
Nagesh Trading CO. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) Directions given by the Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra) were applicable to cases, where notices under Section 148 of the Act had been issued during the period 01st April, 2021 to 30th June, 2021 – which is not the case in the present matter. Consequently, the […]
Many years later, father and son fall out. It does not matter who is to blame for the falling out, but they can no longer work together or even live in close proximity.
