The Kerala High Court, in Poovachal Rural Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs JCIT, directed the Faceless Assessment Centre to use the Verification Unit for physical examination of a co-operative society’s voluminous cash book, acknowledging the difficulty of complete online submission.
CAAR, Mumbai, ruled that imported components for assembling Low Voltage Differential Signaling (LVDS) cameras are classified as Other Parts under Customs Tariff Heading 85299090.
CAAR Mumbai classifies PV Lumens India Pvt. Ltd.’s Portable Computers/Mobile Computers under Customs Tariff 8471.30.90 as automatic data-processing machines. Smartphones classification under 8517 is rejected, emphasizing principal function as ADP over supplementary connectivity features.
CAAR Delhi ruled that Wired Remote Controllers for air-conditioning systems are classifiable under Tariff Item 8537 10 90 as electrical control consoles, not under 8415 90 00 as AC parts, based on functional and technical identity.
Samkwang India seeks advance ruling from CAAR Delhi on nil duty benefit for inputs used to manufacture Assy Case Front’ (front cover) for Samsung mobile phones under Notification 57/2017-Cus, arguing their process qualifies as ‘manufacture.
This guide explains the concept, calculation formula, and notified values of CII from 2001-02 to 2025-26, as per CBDT. A must-read for taxpayers and investors calculating capital gains.
The Allahabad High Court set aside multiple GST show cause notices and assessment orders issued against a firm whose proprietor was already deceased, ruling that proceedings for tax determination cannot be initiated against a dead person but must be directed towards the legal representatives.
ITAT Upholds Taxpayer Rights, Limits Section 148 Reassessments on Net Income: ITAT confirmed that income tax reassessments must be based on net taxable income, not gross sale proceeds. Notices issued beyond the three-year window without exceeding ₹50 lakh threshold are invalid.
The Mumbai ITAT restricted the disallowance for purchases from hawala parties to 25% of the bogus purchase amount, affirming the material was genuinely received and sold, despite fictitious invoices. The ruling relies on the Gujarat High Court’s precedent in Vijay Proteins.
Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that share of profit from taxable AOPs cannot be taxed again in the member’s hands, upholding ITAT’s order in Principal Commissioner vs. Ramesh Chandra Rai.
