Held that it is settled law that there is no bar for grant of such a relief if the Court is of the opinion that the circumstances and the ends of justice so warrant. Since the petitioner has already been granted conditional stay by the Tribunal in respect of the said appeal and that the Tribunal is in the midst of hearing of appeal
Assessee had given the loan to the associate enterprise in U.S.D. and in such a situation when the transaction was in foreign currency, and the transaction was an international transactions, then the transaction would have to be looked upon by applying the commercial principles in regard to international transactions.
Held that, Prima facie, it appears that revenue’s argument is at loggerheads with the notification. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Bombay High Court in case of Niphad Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CEE, 2014 (300) E.L.T. 66 (Bom.) submitted by the appellant.
The award was not for any services rendered but in the nature of testimonial and expression of recognition by an institution of eminence of a person in the field of Journalism. The testimonial paid to any professional or any person as a token of esteem and regard for his ability or qualities
Revenue contended that Tribunal has no authority to extend the period of stay beyond a period of 365 days from the initial date of grant of stay in view of third proviso to section 254(2A). As 365 days would expire on 30.03.2015
A reading of the agreement between STL and the assessee clarifies that a specific amount, i.e., Rs. 9 Crores was paid by the assessee to the transferor who owned commercial rights towards the network and the facilities.
Applicability of TDS to be determined having regard to the agreement between the contracting parties and not by particular assumption of the deductee about the nature of transaction
The various authorities of the Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT 243 ITR 83 has highlighted that the power under Section 263 cannot be invoked to correct a mere error of an AO, based upon an incorrect assumption of fact.
Hon’ble HC did not find any merit in the ground of delay in issuance of notice. Court further remitted the matters ITAT to decide afresh on merits. In the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Calcutta Knitwears, particularly the contextual facts discussed
The reserve, which is required to be created under Section 45-IC, is out of the profits earned by a non-banking financial institution. It is not an amount diverted at source by overriding title. The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 can permit appropriation in respect of the said reserve.
