In re M/s. Nuetech Solar Systems Private Ltd. (GST AAAR Karnataka) On a plain reading of the provisions of Section 100 of the said Act, it is apparent that the same mandates that an appeal should be filed within 30 days from the date of communication of the advance ruling order that is sought to […]
In re Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited (GST AAAR Karnataka) In this case, we find that the Power Banks consists of not only the Lithium-ion Polymer battery but also the circuitry such as ‘charge management system’ and ‘voltage boost converter’. All the components together make up the Power Bank. Admittedly, it is not the battery […]
Recently the Delhi bench of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has passed an order for liquidation in the case of Amtek Auto Limited. The two-judge Bench headed by Justice S J Mukhopadhya, stated in its order ‘As we have noted that more than 270 days have been completed much earlier and no case is made to exclude any period, we hold that adjudicating authority has no other option but to pass order of liquidation.’
Bharat Vikas Parishad Maharana Pratap Nyas Vs CIT (ITAT Delhi) After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that Order under section 80G(5) denying approval to the assessee cannot be sustained in Law. It is not in dispute that assessee has been granted registration under section 12AA of the I.T. Act, 1961, by DIT […]
M/s. EPCOS Electronic Components S. A. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) The next issue is whether the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was prejudicial to the interest of the Assessee. It must be noted here that although the tax calculated as payable in the return filed and accepted by the Department […]
Faisal Ahmed Abdul Malik Javeri Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) No doubt, there are certain decisions, in which it has been held that the provisions of Customs Act will not affect the powers of jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There is absolutely no dispute as regards […]
Rajendra Bastimal Chordiya Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) The issue in the present ground is with respect to the denial of claim of deduction u/s 54B of the Act for the reason that the land was not cultivable. We find that the reason for denying the claim of deduction u/s 54B of the Act was for […]
Sh. Vijay Chaudhary Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Whether the assessee invests the entire sales consideration in construction of a residential house within three years from the date of transfer can he be denied exemption under Section 54F on the ground that he did not deposit the said amount in capital gains account scheme before the […]
Assessee was not eligible for exemption from payment of MAT as per the provisions of section 115JB(6), since, admittedly, it did not qualify as a business or services rendered by an entrepreneur or developer in a unit or SEZ as per definition of the said terms in the SEZ Act.
M/s System India Castings Vs Pr. CIT (Chhattisgarh High Court) It was mentioned that the assessee has preferred an Appeal against the penalty order before the CIT (Appeals), Raipur, which is pending for decision. When the CIT (Appeals) heard the appeal preferred by the assessee on merits, it reached to the conclusion that the petitioner […]
