Kolkatta High Court held in Navin Kumar Agarwal Vs CIT(A) that for the conclusion of search, date of last panchnama was to be seen provided keys had been handed over to the assessee. If the keys were still with the department it meant that department could resume the search any time if necessary irrespective of the fact that only restraint order was vacated on the latter date.
In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. CESTAT, it was held by Madras High Court that the assessee is entitled to Cenvat credit on the capital goods/inputs used in the manufacture of goods which are exempted and which are cleared without payment of duty on Job work basis.
In the case of Commissioner of Customs (Exports) Vs M/s.Sayonara Exports Pvt. Ltd., it was held by High Court of Madras that the assessee is entitled for automatic refund of the Extra Duty Deposit made pending finalisation of the provision assessment without filing an application for refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Trans Asian Shipping Services Private Limited Vs. CIT ( kerala High Court) It was held in the case of the income derived from slot charter operations of a tonnage tax company is not liable to be excluded while determining the tonnage income under the tonnage tax scheme on the ground that such operations are carried on in ships which are not qualifying ships in terms of the provisions of Chapter XII G of the Act.
Calcutta High Court held In the case of CESC Ltd. vs. CIT that Section 43B of the Income Tax Act is attracted to a case where payment is to be made to the State Government in the capacity of the State as a sovereign and not to a case where payment is to be made to the State Government in its capacity
Calcutta High Court held In the case of Hutchison Telecom East Ltd. vs. CIT that the discount allowed to the distributors in respect of starter packs and recharge coupons for its prepaid services will be covered under commission or brokerage, liable to TDS u/s 194H.
The Supreme Court Bar Association favoured NJAC for appointment and transfer of judges. It advocated that it can probe cases of misconduct by judges, including those from the highest judiciary.
ITAT Hyderabad held In the case of M/s. KNR Constructions Ltd. vs. DCIT that no such adverse inference however was drawn by the A.O. in the case of the concerned two sub-contractors and in the assessments completed under section 143(3) in their cases
Smt. Shakeera Begum vs. ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) In the instant case, as the municipal approvals, completion certificates and authentic plans were not available, the ITAT could not conclude whether assessee had constructed new independent house and there was no evidence that the old building was ever demolished.
In the case of Pegasystems Worldwide India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT Hyderabad Bench of ITAT directed the AO to reduce communication cost not only from export turnover but also from the total turnover for the purpose of computation of deduction as per Explanation 2 to section 10A.
