Kerala High Court upholds assessment order against BSNL in a detailed judgment. The telecom company can appeal under the Finance Act, 1994
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruling in Kalp Corporation vs. C.C.E. & S.T. regarding penalty under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act for delayed payment of excise duty and utilization of CENVAT credit.
CESTAT Kolkata’s ruling in the case of Commr. of CGST & Central Excise vs. Calcutta Springs Ltd. regarding service tax demand on fabrication works for Indian Railways without corroborative evidence.
ITAT held that when competent authority issued Form 3CL, which validated assessee’s claim for a deduction that included both capital and revenue expenditure, the departmental authorities could not deny assessee section 35(2AB) deduction.
Gujarat High Court rules that non-consideration of reply and violation of natural justice in GST DRC-7 order requires a fresh hearing. Details and implications.
CESTAT Ahmedabad allows CENVAT credit for the supplier of Rotogravure Printing Cylinders who had paid excise duty correctly. In-depth analysis of the case.
ITAT Pune rules that registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied due to non-receipt of notice, directing de-novo consideration of the application.
CESTAT Bangalore rules in Rafeek K.T. vs Commissioner of Customs case: Retracted statements without corroborative evidence deemed inadmissible.
Explore CESTAT Ahmedabad’s decision in Archna Traders vs. C.C.E. & S.T. on denial of VCES Scheme benefit under Section 106 of Finance Act 2013. Full analysis here.
CESTAT Kolkata case – Mishra & Mishra (Agency) Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Customs. Learn how CHA licenses cannot be revoked without direct involvement.
