Explore the ITAT Ahmedabad ruling in Amit Dhirajlal Doshi vs. DCIT regarding interest expenditure deduction under Section 57 of Income Tax Act.
ITAT Bangalore re-examines deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act for co-operative societies’ investments as per the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.
CESTAT Hyderabad lowers penalty for discrepancies in import declaration due to negligence, in absence of ulterior motive. Detailed analysis of the case.
Case study: JCIT vs. Ajay Sharma. Read NFAC introduction to the case & its findings on Rs. 1.95 crores addition on account of unexplained investment under Section 69 of Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai’s ruling in the case of Fathima Jewellers vs. DCIT clarifies that excess gold jewellery stock found during a survey isn’t unexplained investment under IT Act.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that mis-declaration allegations without complete evidence and violation of natural justice cannot be upheld.
DCIT vs. Krishan Kumar case: ITAT Delhi dismisses appeal by the Department regarding share transaction, ruling it doesn’t fall under the CBDT Circular exception.
Madras High Court’s ruling: Consumers can’t file complaints against the Revenue Department for excessive GST levied by hotel managements. Learn more here.
CESTAT Chandigarh rules in favor of Souvenior Ceramics, granting exemption from excise duty for castable refractory goods supplied to power projects. Detailed analysis here.
The CESTAT Ahmedabad addresses a case involving a refund dispute related to abatement and excise duty, emphasizing the need for clear evidence and transparency.
