ITAT Mumbai held that expenditure incurred on foreign currency on telecommunication charges and provision of technical services outside of India should not be excluded from export turnover for the purpose of computing u/s 10A of the Income Tax Act.
CESTAT Delhi held that any penalty or compensation received for any loss or damage caused by breach or non performance of the terms of the contract is not by way of consideration. Accordingly, service tax is not leviable on the same.
Madras High Court held that prosecution under section 276CC of the Income Tax Act justified due to non-filing of return within the stipulated time and wilfully concealing its true and correct income.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that initiation of revisionary proceedings by issuing show cause notice u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act without Document Identification Number (DIN) makes the entire proceedings invalid-in-law.
Commercial training or coach services that were provided by the Institute of Clinical Research (ICR) were liable to service tax as Commissioner had recorded a finding, after careful examination of the activities undertaken by the Indian Institute that it was providing training or coaching for a consideration. The matter was remitted to the Commissioner to decide whether out of the total demand that had been confirmed, Indian Institute would be entitled to the benefit of – Input credit of the expenses incurred as per the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004; and the value of study material supplied; and cum-tax benefit under section 67 of the Finance Act.
Delhi High Court held that Delhi Gymkhana Club is exigible to Luxury tax on activity of providing residential accommodation by a hotelier for monetary consideration under the Delhi Tax on Luxuries Act, 1996.
CESTAT Allahabad held that in case of foreign export proceeds, the Indian Exporters are not the recipient of services from the Foreign Bank/ intermediary bank. Accordingly, demand of service tax as service recipient on bank charges thereon unjustified.
ITAT Kolkata held that revision of assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) unsustainable as levy of interest u/s. 115P of the Income Tax Act for short payment of Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) u/s. 115-O of the Income Tax Act, which comes under a separate Chapter, was not part of assessment order.
CESTAT Delhi held that area based exemption in terms of Notification No. 50/2003 dated 10.06.2003 available as manufacture of High Security Registration Plates is concluded in Himachal Pradesh only.
Kerala High Court held that denial of input tax credit merely on the ground of difference between Form GSTR -2A and Form GSTR-3B for tax period 2017-2018 unsustainable. The matter is remitted back to the Assessing Authority to reconsider claim of ITC irrespective of Form GSTR 2A
