Compensation received for non-carrying of business was capital in nature as the operation of non- compete agreement was for 10 years and for the period in which the non-compete agreement was to operate, assessee’s source of income had been clamped.
In the Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. vs. Union of India case, Rajasthan High Court ensures GST refund isn’t denied solely due to multiple inputs and outputs.
CESTAT Bangalore held that in the absence of any evidence regarding removal of the goods before completion of the project, the benefit of Notification No.108/95 CE dated 28.08.1995 amended vide Notification No.13/2008 CE dated 01.03.2008 cannot be denied. Accordingly, demand set aside.
Delhi High Court held that initiation of proceedings under section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) without issuance of show cause notice or opportunity notice is against the principle of natural justice and hence untenable-in-law.
Gujarat High Court held that reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act merely based on ‘borrowed satisfaction’ as against statutory requirement of ‘independent satisfaction’ is bad-in-law.
CESTAT Kolkata held that notification no. 41/2012-ST grants refund of service tax paid on the taxable services used for export of goods. The said refund includes refund of Swachh Bharat Cess (SBC) and Krishi Kalyan Cess (KKC) too.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition of amount received as advances as deemed dividend in terms of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as assessee firm is neither registered shareholder nor beneficial shareholder. Concluded that deemed dividend is taxable only in the hands of the shareholder.
As per Revised Pension Rules, 1980, family pension is not admissible to the second wife as marrying another wife, (when one wife is living) without obtaining the approval of Government is contrary to Rule 25 of A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. In absence of Government approval, death benefit not entitled to second wife.
ITAT Delhi held that passing of final assessment order without complying with the terms of section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is untenable in law.
Kerala High Court dismissed the writ petition as provisional attachment made u/s 24(4)(b)(i) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 in respect of the properties of the petitioner was lifted.
