In a tax dispute with Baroda Rayon Corporation, the CESTAT Ahmedabad has ordered a fresh review due to the legal status of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. This case raises critical questions regarding the interpretation and application of taxation laws.
In a significant ruling, ITAT Ahmedabad deemed an assessment under Sec 147 of the Income Tax Act, based solely on cash deposit information, as invalid in the case of DineshkumarDalsangbhai Chaudhary Kankavati Society Vs ITO.
The ITAT Delhi ruling in Arya Samaj Safdarjung Enclave Vs CIT sheds light on the reapplication process for 12A(1)(ac) registration erroneously submitted, encouraging a fresh approach to tax registration for non-profits.
CESTAT Ahmedabad set a precedent in Hussain Sheth Ispat Vs Commissioner of Customs, ruling that Light Displacement Tonnage (LDT) is not relevant to the assessable value of goods, nullifying the differential duty demand.
A critical review of the case between Graphite India Limited and the Commissioner of Customs, with an emphasis on the significance of adhering to Project Import regulations and the implications of not doing so.
Learn about the recent order of the ITAT Chennai in the V. Babu vs ACIT case, where the CIT(A) appeal rejection due to delayed filing by the assessee is set for re-adjudication.
Detailed analysis of the ITAT Delhi judgement in Kamlesh Gupta Vs DCIT case where the tribunal ruled that addition made on estimated profit does not constitute concealment, hence, no penalty.
The ITAT Cochin has upheld the penalty imposed on Paravur Service Cooperative Bank for its failure to furnish the audit report of its accounts audited by the Cooperative Department Auditor within the specified date under Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act.
Iqbal Singh HUF Vs DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh) Non-compliance with order of CIT (Appeals) cannot be sole reason to allow an addition on taxpayer
The ITAT Bangalore has allowed the appeal of Dunichand Khitri Raja against the disallowance of a claim for deduction under section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT held that the delay in filing Form 10CCB, due to technical glitches beyond the assessee’s control, should not bar the claim of deduction.
