Samrat Exporters and Importers Vs Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Kerala High Court) It is an admitted fact that the appellant had challenged the show cause notice issued to it before the appellate authority but the same was filed not within the time prescribed under the Act. Therefore, the appellate authority did not […]
Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Section 215 of the Act makes it clear that the Assessee is required to pay interest where he has paid advance tax less than 75% of the assessed tax, the Assessee is required to pay simple interest @ 15% p.a. from the first day of […]
Healthcubed India Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court) The show cause notices details and articulates the case of the respondent. It is for the petitioner to reply to the show cause notices to have the goods cleared. If the goods were really meant to be sent to Karnataka for which the petitioner […]
Tribunal held the addition to be erroneous and has considered in detail the nature and expenses in respect of which the assessee was sought to be penalized for not deducting the tax deducted at sources, holding that these expenses were in respect of the income accrued outside the territory for services rendered. With this finding the said question was rejected.
M. k. Exim (India) Limited Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) We have also perused the guidelines issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade under circular dated 31.12.2003 for maintaining the denied entities list. It records that most common instance of action leading to refusal of licenses occurs when firms default in export […]
Rohan Tanna Vs Union of India (Chhattisgarh High Court) Applicants are arrested for commission of offences punishable under Sections 16 & 132 (1) (b) & (c) of the GST Act. Section 138 of the GST Act deals with compounding of offences. Offence registered against applicants under Section 132 (1) of the GST Act is made […]
Jharkhand HC rejects discharge plea in Anup Kumar Lakhotia case. Charges framed under IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act. Legal analysis and key details.
Chhattisgarh High Court grants anticipatory bail to Union Bank of India employees in a Prevention of Money Laundering Act case. No custodial interrogation required.
Paradise Rubber Industries Vs PCIT (ITAT Amritsar) Admittedly the present case before us is a case of Limited scrutiny selected for particular points reproduced hereinabove confined to 4 issues. The issue for which the PCIT issued the show cause notice was entirely different than the four issues examined under limited scrutiny by the assessing officer. […]
Coforge Limited (Formerly Known AS NIIT Technologies Ltd) Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: Commuted value of lease rent at 11 times the rent payable for 90 years @ Rs 708913/- which amounted to Rs 7798042/- was deductible as expenditure in the year of payment as assessee chose to incur the liability of a crystallised […]
