HC set aside order passed by Assistant Commissioner and held that revenue officers are required to follow principles of judicial discipline and accordingly are bound by decisions of Appellate Authority.
Vedanta Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) (CESTAT Kolkata) The Appellants have exported Iron Ore Fines declaring the Fe content therein to be less than 64%. Under seven Shipping Bills exports were completed for different overseas importers during the period 2010-2011. Before the shipment, samples were drawn by Customs officials in the presence of the […]
Read detailed analysis of GST Advance Ruling by Uttar Pradesh AAR on appropriate HSN code for foam cup pads, issued to Maavisa Fom CUP Private Limited.
Read detailed analysis of GST Advance Ruling by Uttar Pradesh AAR on including value of material and execution work in taxable value for installation of lines by Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam.
Read detailed analysis of CCI order directing further investigation into 8 projects by Lucknow Development Authority for potential profiteering issues.
Sumit Mansingka Vs E-Homes Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd (Competition Commission of India) Introduction: The recent order issued by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) in the case of Sumit Mansingka vs E-Homes Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd highlights the Commission’s proactive approach towards ensuring compliance and fair practices in the construction and real estate sector. The CCI has […]
Delhi High Court’s ruling on Vinayak Services PVT LTD vs ITO case: Section 148A(d) order quashed due to time-barred Section 148 notice. Learn more about the judgment.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash credit unsustainable as genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of lender duly proved.
ITAT Surat held that seized jewellery within the permissible limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No 1916 dated 11.05.1994 couldn’t be treated as undisclosed jewellery. Accordingly, addition u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act liable to be deleted.
ITAT Kolkata held that reasons for reopening of the assessment recorded by an Authority who was not having territorial jurisdiction over the assessee is unsustainable in law and accordingly the entire reassessment proceeding is liable to be quashed.
