Suo Moto Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Suo Moto Allhabad HC Order Extending The Time Limitations Of Interim Orders In This Phase Of Pandemic In the wake of recent upsurge of pandemic Covid-19, affecting one and all in the State of Uttar Pradesh, consequence whereof the courts at all levels are working with […]
Considering the fact that the petitioner has also not been able to utilize the credit of duty under the provisions of GST which came to be effected from 01.07.2017, legitimate export incentives cannot be denied to the petitioner. I find no merits in denying the benefit of refund claim filed by the petitioner under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Rules, 2004. The respondent shall therefore refund the amount to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Teleperformance Global Services Private Limited Vs Acit (Bombay High Court) The Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki had considered that income, which was subject to be charged to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 was the income of erstwhile entity prior to amalgamation. Transferee had assumed liabilities of transferor company, including that of […]
Innomit Mineral Projects Pvt Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner of Customs (Madras High Court) The petitioner appears to be a victim of the chinese exporter. The petitioner had made a victim of fraud. The petitioner therefore, seek refund of the customs duty paid at the time of filing of Bill of Entry under the self assessment […]
Pankaj Behari Saha Vs State of Tripura (High Court Tripura) Petitioner is a dealer and was registered under the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (TVAT Act, for short) at the relevant time. The Superintendent of Taxes, Udaipur issued a notice on 31.01.2019 to the petitioner under Section 53(3) of the TVAT Act conveying to […]
Axis Ispat Private Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) A perusal of some of the show cause notices (SCNs) which have been issued shows that, there is a doubt as to whether the reply submitted by the Petitioner in June, 2020 has been considered by the ROC while issuing the show cause notices […]
Pernod Ricard India Private Limited Vs State of Goa (Bombay High Court) Record, makes it very clear that for the Assessment Year 2008-09, Shri Ashok Rane, who was then the Assessment Officer, held against the petitioner by rejecting the very contention which the petitioner eventually raised in respect of the assessment for the year 2010-11. […]
Tatia Sky Line & Health Farms Ltd. Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) Conclusion: Expenses incurred by assessee for Public Issue was not allowable as revenue expenditure as assessee miserably failed to establish the tenability and truthfulness of its claim that the expenditure was revenue in nature. Held: Assessee, a public limited company, was in the […]
Carbon Credit was not an offshoot of business, but an offshoot of environmental concerns. No asset was generated in the course of business, but it was generated due to environmental concerns. Therefore, income from sale of carbon credits was to be considered as capital receipt and not liable for tax under any head of income under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Custom Authority had allowed the clearance of Pigeon Peas as there was valid registration of Advance Payment Certificate and registration certificate was binding on the respondents until the completion of the import quota mentioned therein and considering that assessee had imported the import item before 31.03.2021, assessee’s import was required to be declared as valid import under the FTP.
