ITAT Delhi held that TDS under section 194C (and not 194-I) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is deductible in case of Common Area Maintenance Charges (CAM Charges).
Madras High Court held that invocation of extended period of limitation unjustified as non-disclosure or claim of non-liability was on the basis of bonafide interpretation of law.
Calcutta High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that State action for not granting of remission of tax cannot be said to be arbitrary. Accordingly, held that writ petition is devoid of merit.
Madras High Court held that administrative side cannot seek leave to review an order passed by its own judgements on the judicial side as the same would amount to undermining the judicial fibre.
For invoking Section 67 of the Act existence of reasons to believe to subject the premises to search and seize goods is mandated. Here, the authority is vacillating between Section 67 and 68; whether the goods are in transit or in the godown.
ITAT Delhi held that disallowance on ad-hoc basis without any specific allegation merely on the basis of general remarks and observations is unsustainable as assessee has successfully demonstrated that the expense has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business.
ITAT Jaipur held that amount paid towards settling the property dispute is absolutely necessary to affect the transfer and accordingly the same is allowed as expenditure covered by provision of section 48 of the Income Tax Act.
Gujarat High Court held that Tribunal cannot abdicate its duty of deciding the matter on merits till the outcome of pending matter before Apex Court. Section 35C(1) of the the Central Excise Act, mandates the Tribunal to dispose of the appeals on merits.
ITAT Mumbai held that distribution of samples of infant milk substitutes, feeding bottles and infant foods is prohibited under section 4 of Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 1992. Accordingly, the same is not allowable as business expenditure.
CESTAT Chennai held that minor deficiency in the processing may not ipso facto make the leather as not fully finished. Accordingly, satisfying the conditions contained in Public Notice No. 21/2009-14 dated 01.12.2009, the same is freely exportable.
