ITAT Mumbai rules that the date of possession determines eligibility for capital gains deduction under Section 54. Learn more about the Sompalsingh J. Kataria Vs ITO case.
Delhi High Court rules in Mukesh Udeshi vs Jindal Steel Power Ltd, emphasizing that only parties to arbitration proceedings can challenge an arbitral award.
Read the detailed analysis of Prem Prakash Sethi vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) case where ITAT deletes addition on unexplained jewellery and cash. Full text of the order included.
Kerala HC directs Customs to refund 4% SAD to Elite Green Pvt Ltd, despite annulled Circular No.18/2013-Cus, recognizing DEPB scrips as valid payment.
Supreme Court held that Section 206C of the Income Tax Act is not applicable in respect of Mysore Sales and that the liquor vendors(contractors) who bought the vending rights from the appellant on auction cannot be termed as “buyers”
Supreme Court directed constitution of ‘Committee for Service Conditions of the District Judiciary’ overseeing the implementation of the recommendations of the SNJPC as approved by this Court.
Supreme Court held that owner of the goods has liability to pay customs duty and interest even after confiscated goods are redeemed after payment of fine and other charges under section 125 of the Customs Act.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that benefit demonstrated in form of reduced interest rate on account of guarantee, thus, payment of guarantee fee justifiable. Accordingly, TP adjustment on account of the guarantee fee payment to AE deleted.
ITAT Chennai restored the matter back to the file of AO for re-adjudication as additional ground raised by the assessee in appeal were not taken up before lower authorities.
CESTAT Delhi held that SEZ unit is exempted from payment of service tax in terms of provisions of SEZ Act. Accordingly, condition of exemption by way of refund imposed under the provisions of the Finance Act are inconsistent with the provisions of the SEZ Act. Refund granted.
