Explore the Tata Steel vs Union of India case in the Calcutta High Court that addresses whether quasi-judicial authorities can issue non-speaking orders. This judgement holds significance for matters related to GST, income tax, and similar acts.
Read about the Kerala High Court’s ruling in Ajit Associates Architectural Consultants Pvt. Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner. The court quashes the cancellation of GST registration due to lack of reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Analysis of Jagjeet Singh Parwana vs Commissioner of Central Excise case. Non-specific show-cause notice’s impact on Service Tax demand set aside by CESTAT Chandigarh.
Analysis of the CESTAT Kolkata case involving excise duty demand based on differences between balance sheet and ER-1 returns, highlighting the need for substantial evidence.
Analysis of C.C. Ahmedabad vs Smaltochimia India Pvt Ltd case involving customs duty classification dispute for ‘Twin Vision Scanner’ and related equipment.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that CENVAT credit of excise duty is allowable even when 5% of the value of exempted goods is reversed, complying with Rule 6(3)(i) of CENVAT Credit Rules.
CESTAT Bangalore ruled that a refund cannot be rejected when taxpayer provides adequate documents to prove service tax payment and non-availment of CENVAT credit.
Bridgestone India vs. ACIT: ITAT Indore rules subsidies from Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh Govt. are capital receipts, deleting additions in assessment.
Read the analysis of ITAT decision in the case of Rama Mepa Odedara Vs ITO. The appellant appealed against addition of cash deposits under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT considered the source of deposits and concluded that only the profit element should be taxable.
Analysis of Ramky Infrastructure Limited vs. Commissioner of Trade & Taxes case on DVAT Act interest calculation for refunds and tax liability. Legal insights.
