Held that the interest granted by the reference Court u/s. 28 of the Land Acquisition Act from the date of possession of land till the date of judgment of High Court is an accretion of the value of the land acquired, not chargeable to tax.
ITAT Visakhapatnam held that the requirement of both the issuance and service of such notice upon the assessee for the purposes of Section 147 and 148 of the Act are mandatory jurisdictional requirements. Order passed is liable to be quashed on account of non-service of notice u/s 147/148.
The recent ruling from the Calcutta High Court in the case of Madalyns Tea Enterprise Vs Senior Joint Commissioner provides key insights into the issue of smuggling and bogus E-Way Bills. Learn about the Court’s decision on releasing a detained tea consignment amidst allegations of poppy seed smuggling.
HC directed Revenue Authority to release goods on conditions that assessee deposits a certain amount of penalty towards tax in lieu of confiscation of conveyance and furnish bank guarantee in lieu of confiscation of goods.
CESTAT, remanded order passed by Adjudicating Authority and held that denial of cross-examination of witnesses is violative of principles of natural justice.
ITAT Mumbai held that the assessee has merely got the license to use the software for its daily business requirement and has never owned the same. Further, such expense was used for business purpose on yearly rent basis it has not given any enduring benefit. Hence, such expense are revenue in nature.
CESTAT Chennai held that renting of immovable property for a hotel is expressly excluded from the ambit of the taxable service in Section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, demand not sustainable.
Delve into the Karnataka High Court’s ruling on the extended limitation period for ITC refund claims, where the case of Hutti Gold Mines Company Ltd. Vs Union of India was examined.
ITAT Delhi held that amount received from its Indian subsidiary towards IT and SAP charges cannot be treated as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) under Article 12(4)(a) of India – Portugal DTAA. Accordingly, additions unsustainable.
ITAT Delhi held that statue doesn’t empower the Assessing Officer to withdraw or modify or substitute the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act with another assessment order.
