Rectification of order was not made only on apparent error but issue in rectification of order was mixed question of law and fact that on which date service tax is leviable even Cenvat credit issue also involve a detailed scrutiny.
ITAT Delhi held that consideration paid for testing the ability of candidates do not fall within the purview of royalty under Article 13 of India-UK DTAA. Hence, there is no obligation withholding of tax u/s 195 of the Income Tax Act.
CESTAT Bangalore quashes appeal, permitting the refund of 4% Special Additional Duty (SAD) on imported goods without the need for VAT Challans to show the Bill of Entry.
CESTAT Chandigarh held that in view of the wider scope given in the definition under Section 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, cenvat credit of all the Input Services used in or in relation to the manufacture and sale of final products or in relation to the business activity cannot be denied.
CESTAT Chennai held that nature of service involving both service as well as transfer of property in goods/material is classifiable under ‘works contract. Hence re-classifying the same under erection, commission and installation is unsustainable in law.
The case revolved around an order issued under Section 263 of Income Tax Act. The issue at hand was whether absence of the DIN in order rendered it invalid, despite subsequent communication.
ITAT Jaipur held that reassessment of income under section 147 of the Income Tax Act other than income in respect of which AO has formed a reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Pune held that in view of huge quantitative differences, Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method cannot be applied. Hence, Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) is applicable in respect of international transaction of ‘Sale of Finished Goods’.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that CENVAT Credit on inputs used for fabrication of capital goods like pollution control equipment, heating furnace, casting machine, coating machine, chimney, rolling machine, reheating machine, control panel, etc. is eligible.
ITAT Kolkata held that when original return filed was defective and such defect is removed u/s. 139(9) of the Income Tax Act, the return filed u/s. 139(1) becomes a valid return from the date when it was originally filed. Accordingly, set off business income with carry forwarded business loss allowed.
