Excise Duty : In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed that Section 35FF of the Excise Act indicates that interest ...
Corporate Law : In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble High Court quashed the proceedings under Section 385 of IPC pertaining to extortion as...
Corporate Law : Unravel the Rahul Gupta vs CPIO case where the CIC upheld that public authorities are not obliged to provide opinions or advice u...
Corporate Law : Rajasthan High Court upheld order of Electricity Ombudsman, which allowed recovery of transformation losses and pro-rata transform...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held in case of DCIT v Hitz FM Radio India Ltd. that expenditure related to licence fee and royalty which helps merely ...
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed that Section 35FF of the Excise Act indicates that interest would commence from the date of the order of the Appellate Authority as distinct from the making of an application which is prescribed to be the starting point insofar as Section 11BB of the Act is concerned.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble High Court quashed the proceedings under Section 385 of IPC pertaining to extortion as in the present case, the petitioners acted as per the agreement between the parties to demand their legitimate dues.
Unravel the Rahul Gupta vs CPIO case where the CIC upheld that public authorities are not obliged to provide opinions or advice under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Rajasthan High Court upheld order of Electricity Ombudsman, which allowed recovery of transformation losses and pro-rata transformer cost from large industrial consumers. The court reasoned that an order supported by factual findings and necessary documents cannot be considered arbitrary.
ITAT Delhi held in case of DCIT v Hitz FM Radio India Ltd. that expenditure related to licence fee and royalty which helps merely in facilitating the assessee’s trading operations or enabling the management to be carried more effectively is revenue in nature even if advantage may endure for an indefinite future.
ITAT Delhi held in case of ITO v Shri Sameer Jasuja the property has been gifted by the person to his wife, then Assessee will entitled to the exemption u/s 54F if he is left with one property. It further held that section 64(1)(iv) will not operate to nullify gift and would operate only to club income in the hands of donor assessee.
ITAT-Ahmedabad In the case of M/s Shiv Associates v DCIT quashed the notice u/s 153C relying on the Judgment of the similar case related to the assessee in which the notices u/s 153C were quashed as no satisfaction was recorded by the AO.
ITAT Kolkata held in case of ITO v Smt. Gayatri Chakroborty that where the transactions are mutual in nature or there is benefit or no benefit to each other, then these kind of transactions will not come under the purview of section 2(22)(e).
ITAT Mumbai held in the case of DCIT v. Rama Capital and Financial Services Ltd. that without any substantive ground reopening cannot be done on the basis of change of opinion. It Further held that without any supporting material, the A.O. cannot substitute market value.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of DCIT v. The Indian Hotels Co. Pvt. Ltd. that principle of consistency should be followed when there were similar issues and the similar principal was laid down in the case of Assessee’s Sister Concern.
