The Customs Authority for Advance Ruling (CAAR), Mumbai, declined to rule on the customs classification of ‘Roasted Areca Nuts,’ holding that the issue was already decided by the Madras High Court in the applicant’s own case, despite a change in the Customs Tariff Item number.
India’s competition watchdog launches investigation against UFO, Qube, and PVR INOX over the continued levy of Virtual Print Fee (VPF) on film producers.
ITAT Delhi quashed Balaji Metal Tech’s assessment, ruling it void due to mechanical approval, wrong section use (143(3) instead of 153C), and failure to mention DIN in the order.
ITAT Mumbai quashes PCIT’s S. 263 revision against Colgate Palmolive, holding PCIT cannot disregard binding Coordinate Bench order based merely on Supreme Court appeal pendency.
ITAT Delhi quashes search assessments, ruling consolidated S. 153D approval for multiple assessees was mechanical, violating judicial mandate for independent application of mind.
Construction was funded through borrowed money, and assessee sought to utilize the account funds to repay the debt. However, Department denied the request to close the account and release funds citing incomplete construction, use of borrowed funds, non-filing of returns for the relevant assessment years, and non-compliance with Section 54F conditions.
The final order passed by the tax authority, however, cancelled assessee’s registration with retrospective effect. Assessee’s main argument was that this action was illegal because the SCN never mentioned or proposed a retrospective cancellation; it only proposed a simple cancellation.
Madras HC rules consolidated GST SCN/order covering multiple financial years is impermissible, violating the statutory limitation framework. Orders quashed; new proceedings allowed.
ITAT held that provisions taxing difference in stamp value and purchase price apply only to land and buildings, not leasehold rights. Addition of ₹21.95 lakh was set aside.
Assessee argued that the order was barred by limitation because it was not served within the prescribed time. AO countered this, claiming the order was dispatched via speed post on December 30, 2017, and had thus left the office within the deadline.
