Provisions of Section 50 (2) of the Act would apply to a case where the assessee transfers one or more block of assets, which he was using in running of his business. Such is not the case here because in this case, the assessee sold the entire business as a running concern.
It is apparent from the aforesaid dictum of this Court that providing of plural remedies is valid when two or more remedies are available to a person even if inconsistent, they are valid. It is for the person to elect one of them and there is no question of repugnancy in providing such remedy.
HC held that denial of benefit of waiver of crop loans to the farmers who had cultivated lands exceeding 5 acres is a clear discrimination violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
1. This appeal under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(the Act) assails the order dated 31st October, 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). The impugned order relates to Assessment Year 2006-07 2. This appeal was admitted on 28th January, 2015 on the following substantial questions of law:-
Honble Supreme Court and jurisdictional High Courts gave the rulings that reversal of Cenvat credit will amount to not taking Cenvat credit and accordingly benefit of relevant exemption notifications was held to be available to such assessees who reverse Cenvat credit earlier taken.
Study of Hindi should be compulsory for all the students of I-VIII standard, so that all the Indian citizens can easily communicate with each other. It will promote fraternity, unity and national integration, the great golden goals as set out in Preamble of the Constitution.
Though, advance received by assessee company may have been for the benefit of the aforementioned registered shareholders, it could only be assessed in the hands of those registered shareholders and not in the hands of the assseeee-company.
As no amount has been deposited by the contemnor, we are inclined to go ahead with auction for the Aamby Valley City near Lonavala, Maharashtra. Let the matter be listed at 2 p.m. on 27th April, 2017, on which day, the contemnor, Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara, shall remain personally present before this Court.
SC held that before admitting an appeal under Section 130E(b) of the Customs Act, the following conditions must be satisfied: (i) The question raised or arising must have a direct and/or proximate nexus to the question of determination of the applicable rate of duty or to the determination of the value of the goods for the purposes of assessment of duty. This is a sine qua non for the admission of the appeal before this Court under Section 130E(b) of the Act.
(i) Whether the second proviso to Section 3(2) of the Entry Tax Act is ultra vires to the Constitution? (ii) Whether interest can be levied in the matter of late payment of entry tax under the Entry Tax Act, by virtue of the provisions of the Bihar Finance Act, and, with the aid of Section 8 of the Entry Tax Act?
