Bombay High Court held that Circular No.5-2012 dated 1 August 2012 will not be applicable to the instant case pertaining to AY 2008-09. Law to be applied is the one that is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. Accordingly addition unsustainable.
HC held that it is not the object of GST law to curtail right of the assessee to carry out business. Further restored GST registration of assessee which was cancelled due to non-filing of GST returns.
ITAT held that, transfer of property only takes place when either possession of property is transferred or sale deed is executed and documents like unregistered ‘Banakhat’ or power of attorney are not substitute of sale deed.
Calcutta High Court dismissed the petition of Kolkata Municipal Corporation in absence of any evidence proving establishing direct or indirect involvement of the respondent company to have advertised its product without permission.
Gujarat High Court held that looking at the kind of quantum of gold smuggled in India, it is impossible to accept that petitioner has no financial capacity. Accordingly, pre-deposit mandatory under section 129E of the Customs Act for further proceedings.
Delhi High Court held that as per regulation 17(1) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations 2018, notice for revocation of license to the customs broker is to be issued within a period of 90 days from the receipt of offence report. Order unsustainable as notice issued beyond the period of 90 days,
Bombay High Court held that AO failed to satisfy the direction given by the court while issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order for reopening of assessment and demanding penalty u/s 271(1)(c) are quashed and set aside.
ITAT Mumbai held that catalyst expenditure merely used as consumables is revenue expenditure. Accordingly, the same is allowable as deduction.
Bombay High Court held that granting of license to developer (who entered into assessees land for the purpose of development) doesnt amount to ‘allowing the possession of the land within the meaning of section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.
CESTAT Bangalore held that penalty under section 112 of the Customs Act against steamer agent unsustainable as confiscation of the said vessel for alleged violations of chapter VI of Customs Act, 1962 as well as the duty liability arising from misuse of ‘ship stores’ and ‘bunkers’ set aside.
