CESTAT observed that the appellant executed complete government construction projects on a turnkey basis and was responsible for all aspects of implementation. Since the contracts were composite works contracts, the service tax demand failed.
The ITAT Mumbai held that revision under Section 263 was not justified where the Assessing Officer had examined and consciously allowed deduction under Section 80G for eligible CSR expenditure.
The ITAT Mumbai held that ESOP discount is an allowable deduction under Section 37(1), observing that the pendency of an SLP against a High Court judgment does not justify disallowance.
The ITAT Delhi held that foreign exchange fluctuation gains arising from export of services must be treated as operating income for transfer pricing purposes. It also ruled that the Safe Harbour Rules were not applicable to the relevant assessment year.
The ITAT held that no addition under Section 56(2)(viib) was warranted where shares were allotted to existing shareholders and no fresh funds were received during the relevant year. The Tribunal deleted the addition after finding the assessee’s valuation supported by registered valuers.
The Orissa High Court held that the Section 143(2) notice was issued by an authority lacking jurisdiction and set it aside. The Court left it open to the competent authority to issue a fresh notice in accordance with law.
The Mumbai ITAT held that ownership premises received under a redevelopment scheme are acquired in exchange for valuable tenancy rights and cannot be treated as having a nil cost. It directed the Assessing Officer to adopt the fair market value of the surrendered tenancy rights for recomputing capital gains.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that an unsigned GST assessment order is invalid and cannot be sustained. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication subject to deposit of 20% of the disputed tax.
The Cochin Bench held that the minimum one-acre condition must be satisfied by the land comprising the approved housing project itself. It ruled that unrelated land or structures cannot be included to claim deduction under Section 80-IB(10).
ITAT Kolkata held that appellate authority should have awaited outcome of pending condonation application before deciding exemption claim. Matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after considering competent authority’s decision.
