CESTAT Allahabad quashes Service Tax demand against a contractor, ruling that reliance solely on unverified ITR and Form 26AS data is insufficient and invalidates the extended limitation period.
Bombay High Court admits Revenue’s appeal against ITAT. Issues concern if contracts reallocated to JV members require TDS (S. 194C) and where profit should be taxed.
Delhi ITAT allows Sanco Holding, a Norwegian company, to compute income from bareboat charter of seismic vessels under Article 21(4) of the India-Norway DTAA (7.5% presumptive tax on gross receipts), rejecting the Assessing Officer’s attempt to tax it under Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act.
The ITAT ruled that the Assessing Officer’s mechanical application of Rule 8D for Section 14A disallowance was invalid without recording proper satisfaction. The Tribunal directed that only net interest (interest paid less interest earned) and only those investments that yielded exempt income should be considered for re-computation, upholding the assessee’s legal objections.
Shringar Developers wins ITAT appeal. Tribunal rules that higher taxable interest than expense negates Section 14A disallowance. Interest on capital contribution to firm held for commercial expediency under Section 36(1)(iii).
ITAT Delhi ruled AO cannot use Section 154 to disallow ESI/PF deduction based on the later Supreme Court Checkmate judgment, as the issue was previously debatable.
Drawing on precedents, the ITAT held that a mandatory Section 153D approval for search assessments must be proven. The assessment order was set aside because the Department could not locate or produce the JCIT’s prior approval and satisfaction note after eight years.
The ITAT Delhi heard an appeal from Kamal Kant, whose set-off of non-speculative business losses from Futures & Options (F&O) against Capital Gains income was disallowed by the tax authorities. Citing Section 71(2) of the Income-tax Act and judicial precedent, the ITAT found the set-off permissible.
Delhi High Court denies Airports Authority of India’s petition against the rejection of Rs. 9.34 Cr transitional CENVAT Credit claim, citing failure to submit supporting documents, not just a software glitch.
The Delhi High Court set aside a GST demand order against Hind Paper House, citing the department’s failure to properly upload the Show Cause Notice and Relied Upon Documents, and directed a fresh hearing.
