DEN Networks Limited Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court) HC held that We have to reiterate that the inconsistent provisions in the Bihar State legislations which were sought to be continued for one year or till the amendment or repeal by the respective State Legislatures, by virtue of Section 19 of the 101st Amendment, […]
Kanta Govind Singh Vs ACIT CPC TDS (ITAT Ahmedabad) Assessee, aged 85 years, purchased property from non-residents joint owners. TDS was deducted u/s 195 at lower rates as the sellers obtained lower tax certificates. Sale consideration was paid on 20.06.19 & TDS was also paid on the same day though assessee could have paid the […]
DCIT Vs Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills (ITAT Amritsar) The undisputed facts in the present case are that the assessee claimed excise duty refund and interest subsidy as revenue receipt in the return of income and the assessment order was passed on 17.12.2009. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of J & K in the case of […]
CESTAT held that, there should be mens rea to evade payment of service tax for demand of service tax and penalty beyond period of limitation.
CESTAT Kolkata held that demand of excise duty in terms of rule 8 of the Valuation Rules not sustainable as correct higher duty already paid in terms of rule 4 of the Valuation Rules.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that waiver of mandatory pre-deposit under section 35-F of the Central Excise Act 1944 not accepted. However, alternative prayer to grant extension of time limit for pre-deposit accepted and three months further time is granted.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the income generated by the assessee cannot be held bogus only based on the modus operandi. To hold income earned by the assessee as bogus, specific evidence has to be brought on record by the Revenue. In absence of any specific finding, assessee cannot be held to be guilty.
Supreme Court held that it is not everything said by a Judge when giving judgment that constitutes a precedent. The only thing in a Judge’s decision binding as a legal precedent is the principle upon which the case is decided
ITAT Bangalore held that when the proviso to section 36(1)(vii) applies to bad debts written off relating to rural advances, the same cannot be applied for disallowing deduction claimed on account of write off of bad and doubtful debts relating to nonrural/urban advances.
Supreme Court held that amendment to section 2(17) of West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 by omitting the word ‘blending of tea’ from definition of ‘manufacture’ stopped the benefit of exemption from payment of sales tax. Enactment of such amendment without appropriate justification by the Government brings in play doctrine of legitimate expectation.
