Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Karnataka High Court

Cenvat claim cannot be denied on goods destroyed in fire merely because Insurance company paid for that inclusive of excise duty

February 4, 2012 10389 Views 0 comment Print

CCE Vs. Tata Advanced Materials Ltd. (Karnataka HC)- Merely because the Insurance Company paid the assessee the value of goods including the excise duty paid, that would not render the availment of the cenvat credit wrong or irregular. At the same time, it does not confer any right on the Excise Department to demand reversal of credit or default to pay the said amount.

Payment under inter-linked contracts for manufacturing attracts TDS u/s 194C

February 3, 2012 2311 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs. Nova Nordisk Pharma India Ltd. (HC of Karnataka)- We find that this is not simply a situation of a product manufactured to the specifications of the assessee, being sold to the assessee at the price fixed by the supplier but this is a situation where a product manufactured out of raw materials supplied by a foreign company who had direct interest in the assessee company so manufactured to the specification of the assessee company utilising the technical know-how supplied by it and also labelling the product with the brand name of the assessee and supplying the entire product only to the assessee company

Exemption u/s. 54 in respect of more than one residential flat acquired by assessee under joint development agreement with builder

January 29, 2012 6605 Views 0 comment Print

CIT v. Smt. K. G. Rukminiamma – Can exemption under section 54 be claimed in respect of more than one residential flat acquired by the assessee under a joint development agreement with a builder, wherein the property owned by the assessee was developed by the builder who constructed eight residential flats in the said property, four of which were given to the assessee?

Property license fees is income from other sources and can not be treated as income from house property

January 10, 2012 2541 Views 0 comment Print

CIT v. ASK Bros. Family Trust -(Karnataka High Court) – It is clear from the above said clauses that the intention of the parties while entering into the agreement dt. 1.4.1994 was only to grant license to the respondent and it cannot be said to be a lease deed. Further, having regard to the nature of consideration to be paid by the licensee as per clause 3 referred to above and the schedule mentioned in the agreement,

Notional Consideration U/s. 50C Eligible for Deduction U/s. 54F

January 6, 2012 6589 Views 1 comment Print

The ultimate object and purpose of Section 50C of the IT Act is to see that the undisclosed income of capital gains received by the assessees should be taxed and the law should not encourage and permit the assessee to peg down the market value at their whims and fancy to avoid tax.

Outward transportation of finished goods from the place of removal covered by definition of ‘input service’ upto 31.03.2008, service tax paid thereon eligible as CENVAT Credit

December 20, 2011 2786 Views 0 comment Print

Outward transportation of finished goods from the place of removal covered by definition of ‘input service’ upto 31.03.2008, service tax paid thereon eligible as CENVAT Credit – CESTAT Larger Bench decision in ABB Ltd & Ors to this extent legal and valid till 01.04.2008 – No merit in Revenue Appeals. Revenue Appeals rejected.

Artificially Created Light Energy (ACLE) not goods, Consequently there is no sale of goods

December 20, 2011 1487 Views 0 comment Print

(a) The light energy which is used as a carrier in telecommunication service for rendering service is covered by the Parliamentary Legislation i.e. the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 65 (109-a). It does not fall within the Entry 54 of List-II of VII Schedule. (b) The contract in question is not a composite contract. It is an indivisible contract and a contract of service simplicitor. There is no element of sale at all to any extent. It is not a contract of sales simplicitor as contended by the State.

Penalty u/s 271C not leviable when assessee misconstrued provisions

December 8, 2011 3593 Views 0 comment Print

In the instant case, the assessee is a Co-operative Bank. Clause 5 of sub-section (3) of Section 194A expressly exempts the Bank from deducting the tax at source on interest payable by the Bank to its members and other Co-operative Societies. As stated by the assessee, they did not properly construe this provision. By mis­construing this provision they also did not deduct tax from the interest payable to non-members.

Benefit of rebate u/s 88E is available to assessee in MAT Assessment on book profits u/s 115JB

October 24, 2011 3201 Views 0 comment Print

The contention that this benefit is not available to assessee whose total income is assessed u/s 115JB has no substance. In other words, when the total income is assessed u/s 115JB has no substance. In other words when the total income is assessed and the tax chargeable is computed, it is from that tax which is chargeable, the tax paid under section 88 is given deduction, by way of rebate, under section 87 of the Act. This is the legislative intent. That is a promise to give deduction of the tax already paid. This is the mode in which tax already paid is handed back at the time of final computation.

Carrying charitable activities through other trust is to be treated as fulfillment of trust objects

October 19, 2011 669 Views 0 comment Print

As regards first objection, from the finding of the Director (Exemption) it is undisputed that the assessee was carrying on charitable activity through another trust. Once the evidence produced disclose that the funds of the trust is applied for carrying on charitable activities, the purpose of establishing the trust is fully satisfied.

Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031