Andhra Pradesh HC

Explanation 3 to section 147 has no application In relation to issue cropped up subsequent to original assessment on new set of facts

CIT Vs . Swarna Andhra Ijmii Integrated Township Development (P) Ltd. (Andhra Pradesh High Court At Hyderabad)

Explanation 3 will be applicable in case where live issue, which was subsisting at the time of original assessment and if such issue has escaped the determination of the assessing officer, can be a ground for reopening. Any new issue that has cropped up subsequently on new set of facts, the aforesaid Explanation has no application. ...

Read More

Reopening on ground that returned income is lower in comparison to income offered by others is invalid

Rajender Goud Chepur Vs. ITO (Andhra Pradesh And Telangana High Court)

Assessing officers completely erred in reopening assessments on the basis of either a suspicion that there is suppression of income or on the basis that persons in the same line of business are returning a higher income. Without even mentioning the comparables, no initiation of proceedings under section 147 can be made....

Read More

Initiation of Penalty Proceeding U/s. 271(1)(c) in absence of clear finding is invalid

Pr CIT Vs. Baisetty Revathi (Andhra Pradesh High Court)

Pr CIT Vs. Baisetty Revathi (Andhra Pradesh High Court) In the present case, the assessee seems to have submitted her explanation on merits without raising a doubt as to what was the precise allegation leveled against her. However, we are more concerned with the principle involved and not just the isolated case of its application [&hellip...

Read More

Sec. 11 deduction on fees for Providing Assistance to Banks & Financial Institutions

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Institute for Development and Research in Banking Technology (Andhra Pradesh High Court)

Principal CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Institute for Development and Research in Banking Technology (Andhra Pradesh High Court) Held by ITAT The circumstances under which the services rendered by the appellant society to the Banks make clear that there is no profit motive in such activities because these activities were entrusted to the appellan...

Read More

Levy of Capital Gain Tax when assessee denies ownership and sale

Smt. Uppada Sarvani Vs ITO (Hyderabad High Court)

Admittedly, the petitioner has lodged a police complaint that her name has been misused in a document in respect of a property of which she is not the owner. Therefore, the matter requires further detail prob....

Read More

No VAT under Telangana VAT Act, 2005 on transfer of a business as a whole

M/s. Paradise Food Court Vs. State of Telangana (Andhra Pradesh High Court)

 A careful look at the reason for Rule 36 being inserted, which cannot be correlated to anyone of the matters enumerated in Clauses (a) to (r) of sub-section (2) of Section 78, will show that in the entire Telangana VAT Act, 2005, the only place where a transfer of business as a whole is spoken […]...

Read More

If marks are not affixed on goods then it cannot be said that brand-name has been affixed

The Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise Vs M/s. Voltarc India (P) Ltd. (Andhra Pradesh High Court)

Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise Vs.M/s.Voltarc India (P) Ltd. (Andhra Pradesh High Court)- Tribunal also found that Voltarc symbol which was being used on the wrapper and packer was reflecting only the name of the company...

Read More

If department alleges collection of taxes, then burden to prove the same also lies on it

Commissioner of Customs & C.Ex Vs Rayan Pharma Ltd (Andhra Pradesh High Court)

In the present case it appears that the Commissioner has assumed that in respect of all the clearances, the appellant has collected Excise Duty. If the department makes the allegation that the appellant had collected money representing Excise Duty...

Read More

Excise: Extended period can be invoked only if there is suppression of material facts, collusion or any wilful mis-statement

Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise Vs M/s.Grip Engineers (P) Ltd. (Andhra Pradesh High Couts)

Commissioner Of Customs And Central Excise Vs M/S Grip Engineers Pvt Ltd. (High Court of Andhra Pradesh)- In this Show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 22.04.2003 i.e. beyond the period of one year from the date of clearance of excisable goods invoking proviso to Section 11A of the Act...

Read More

In case of doubt on dutiability of goods, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked

The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise Vs M/s Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. (Andhra Pradesh High Court)

The Tribunal had also, considering the fact that when there was a scope for doubt whether the goods were dutiable or not, refused to apply extended period of limitation. The Tribunal relied on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Camphor Drugs and Laminates...

Read More
Page 1 of 812345...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,778)
Company Law (3,945)
Custom Duty (6,989)
DGFT (3,704)
Excise Duty (4,144)
Fema / RBI (3,494)
Finance (3,684)
Income Tax (27,614)
SEBI (2,916)
Service Tax (3,371)