The Tribunal held that credit depends on the nature of duty and not the rate at which it is paid. The key takeaway is that concessional CVD does not bar CENVAT credit.
The Court held that taxes paid under GST must be reimbursed under contractual terms. The key takeaway is that proof of payment ensures entitlement to reimbursement.
The Tribunal held that since the Assessing Officer made no addition after verifying disclosures, the grievance lacked merit. Grounds were rightly treated as infructuous due to absence of tax impact.
The issue was whether reassessment notice issued after six years was valid. The Court upheld that such notices are time-barred and cannot be sustained under law.
The Court examined whether reassessment notice issued beyond limitation was valid. It held that notices issued after expiry of the six-year limit under the old regime are barred and liable to be set aside.
The case examined whether a tube-fed nutritional liquid qualifies as a beverage. Authorities held that its clinical use and lack of consumption as a drink exclude it from beverage classification.
The Court held that reassessment under Sections 147/148 cannot be initiated solely on third-party data without independent evidence of income escapement. It ruled that such reopening amounts to suspicion and lacks the required “reason to believe.”
The Tribunal upheld disallowance of deduction where donations were routed back to donors through layered transactions. The key takeaway is that non-genuine donations do not qualify for tax deduction.
The Supreme Court affirmed that payments for cloud computing services are not royalty where no intellectual property rights are transferred. It held that mere access to services does not amount to use of equipment or technology under tax law.
The Court held that the issue of treating DRP upload as receipt was already settled by earlier rulings. It dismissed the Revenue’s appeals while making the decision subject to the Supreme Court’s final outcome.
