Read how ITAT Mumbai imposes a cost of Rs 5,000 on Edifice Properties Pvt Ltd for non-compliance with notices in their appeal against the CIT(A) order.
Discover how CESTAT Kolkata ruled in favor of Guru Shipping & Clearing Pvt Ltd, waiving penalties due to a lack of evidence for tax evasion. Full text of the order.
CESTAT Chennai sets aside excise duty demand on silk yarn, ruling that the transaction value cannot be rejected without cogent reasons. Full text of the order.
Kerala High Court directs readjudication of input tax credit (ITC) claim, stating that discrepancies between GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B alone cannot be grounds for denial
Explore the Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Kolkata) case regarding the determination of duty on iron ore fines based on WMT.
Supreme Court held that an aggrieved party is entitled to receive compensation from the party who has broken the contract whether or not actual damage or loss is proved to have been caused by the breach.
Kerala High Court dismissed the writ petitioner stating that as authority empowered u/s. 5 of PMLA Act scrutinized the materials while passing provisional attachment order and hence it is not justifiable to exercise extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
ITAT Mumbai held that the entire assessment order have not been passed in the case of non-existing entity i.e. amalgamated entity is null and void and hence liable to be quashed.
ITAT Chennai held that the services rendered by non-resident agent for completion of export commitment would not fall under the definition for fee for technical services. Hence, disallowance alleging non-deduction of TDS unjustified.
ITAT Mumbai held that the fee paid by the assessee i.e. Tata Consultancy Services towards the brand to Tata and Sons Ltd. is not capital in nature for the reason that the brand is not owned by the assessee. Hence, there cannot be any TP adjustment towards the amount that ought to have been received by the assessee towards brand royalty.
