CCECE Vs. M/s. Surana Telecom Limited (High Court of Andhra Pradesh) Rule 57L of the Rules which says that no credit of money on the inputs used in the manufacture of the final products shall be allowed if the final products are exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon
In the case of M/s.Thirumurugan Enterprises Vs The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that remanding back the case by Tribunal, without going into merits and asking the adjudicating authority to re-adjudicate the matter will not suffice.
The assessee was not satisfied as the assessing officer did not allow the depreciation which was subsequently claimed during the course of assessment proceedings. The assessee in Cross Objection has challenged the order of the learned CIT (Appeals) in upholding the disallowance of claim of Rs.2, 57, 90,420/- made by the trust in respect of excess utilization made in the earlier years.
Madhukar B. Thakoor vs. ITAT (Bombay High Court)- Hon’ble Supreme Court cautioned the Presiding Officer of the Courts and Tribunals from adversely commenting and remarking on the conduct of parties or their representatives or pleaders.
We find no merit in Revenue’s case for disregarding the gift of a house property by the assessee to her spouse prior to the transfer date (of the original asset) for the purpose of reckoning eligibility to exemption u/s.54F of the Act.
The facts and which are taken from the director’s report itself would indicate that the Assessee had disclosed what was relevant and necessary for the purpose of making assessment. The Assessee did not hold back any document nor failed to supply any information in addition to the explanation given by it in writing concerning the said management fees expenses. In the circumstances, this is a clear case of change of opinion and based on which, the reassessment is proposed.
Calcutta High Court held In the case of CIT vs. Mihir Kanti Hazra that it is well settled that creditworthiness of the alleged creditors and the source of the source are relevant enquiries. In the case of CIT Vs Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. reported in (1994) 208 ITR 465
The Punjab VAT Tribunal in one of my cases namely Welspun Projects Limited vs State of Punjab Appeal No. 146 of 2014 decided on 27.04.2015, has quashed the penalty levied u/s 51 of Punjab VAT Act, 2005 on the roadside, as the same was levied without serving proper notice and thereby denying reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant.
Issue- Whether the insertion of sub clause (iv) in Section 80-IB(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 conferring the benefit of the deduction under this Section to undertakings engaged in commercial production of natural gas in blocks licensed under VIIIth round of bidding provided
Assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act are not a game of hide and seek. The inquiry in the wake of a notice under Section 148 is not an empty formality. It must be effective and with a sense of purpose.
