ITAT Mumbai ruled that government incentives to promote industrial development in disaster-hit Kutch and modernization under TUF scheme are capital receipts. Revenue’s appeal was dismissed, reaffirming purpose test from Ponni Sugars and Sahney Steel.
The case addressed the disallowance of Rs.2.21 Cr on dealer foreign tour expenses, which the AO questioned for lack of formal agreements. The ITAT confirmed the deletion of the addition, ruling the expenses were genuine business promotion and commercially expedient under S 37(1) particularly since a similar scheme was accepted for the holding company.
ITAT Hyderabad held that deduction claimed under section 43B of the Income Tax Act supported by necessary documentary evidences is allowable. Accordingly, deduction allowed to the extent relevant evidences are furnished.
The case addressed a Rs.605 Cr addition under Section 68 for alleged bogus sales, where the AO didn’t reject the books. The ITAT remanded the matter, directing the AO to recompute income by applying the average three-year Gross Profit rate on sales, establishing that entire sales cannot be taxed as unexplained credits when books aren’t rejected.
Gujarat High Court held that reopening of assessment based on direction of CIT(A) cannot be sustained since the period of limitation prescribed under section 149(1) of the Income Tax Act has expired. Accordingly, reassessment notice u/s. 148 quashed and petition is allowed.
CAAR, Mumbai, ruled that Thermal Printer Ribbons are essential parts of thermal printers and classifiable under CTH 8443 99 59, rejecting classification under Heading 9612 meant for inked ribbons.
CAAR Mumbai held that VitalArmor Ca M10, a milk-derived mineral concentrate, is a dietary supplement classifiable under Heading 2106 90 99, rejecting its classification as a chemical compound or whey product.
CESTAT Delhi held that Epoxy Resin imported was an impregnation resin and goods were duly cleared by customs under DFIA licence as ‘impregnation resin’. Accordingly, demand of duty denying benefit of DFIA licence cannot be sustained.
ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of third party statement substantiated with tangible material is justifiable. Accordingly, matter restored back to CIT(A) with liberty to assessee to place supporting documents explaining source of cash deposits.
ITAT Lucknow held that cash deposits during demonetization period cannot be treated as unexplained credit since the same is made out of cash sales. Accordingly, addition merely on suspicion, doubt, conjecture and guess work cannot be sustained.
