CAAR Delhi held that Motorola TLK 100, TLK 110, and TLK 150 PoC devices are push-button telephones under Tariff Item 8517 1810, rejecting classification as general communication apparatus.
CAAR Delhi held that both Air Start and Air Conditioning Units, designed exclusively for aircraft servicing, are classifiable under Heading 8807 as aircraft parts, not general machinery.
CAAR Delhi held that decorative PVC, PS, and PU wall panels used for interior decoration are classifiable under Heading 3921 as plastic sheets, not builders’ ware under Heading 3925.
CAAR Delhi held that SFP and similar transceiver modules are integral parts of network equipment, not standalone machines, and thus qualify for classification under 8517 79 90 with nil BCD under Notification No. 57/2017-Customs.
Upholding the CIT(A)’s decision, the ITAT confirmed that the charitable trusts claim for exemption on ₹2.45 crore application of income could not be denied. The ruling establishes that the registration granted under Section 12AA, even if initially delayed, holds legal force for the current assessment year, nullifying the AOs attempt to tax voluntary contributions.
ITAT quashes Rs.8.8 Cr penalty u/s 271G on Atul Ltd.. Penalty applies for non-furnishing TP docs, not for TPO’s rejection of the assessee’s benchmarking method. Cites Delhi HC precedent.
The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh on its merits, including a ₹75 lakh unexplained cash advance addition, after finding that the earlier dismissal was based purely on a procedural technicality. The ruling emphasizes that the CIT(A) must use their wide powers to adjudicate on merits and cannot reject an appeal at the threshold.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition towards unexplained expenditure merely on the basis of suspicion based on information received from another authority without independent enquiry cannot be sustained. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
NCLAT Chennai held that application under section 244 of the Companies Act, 2013 seeking waiver by the non-members cannot be allowed. Accordingly, order quashed and appeal stands allowed.
CESTAT Delhi held that photography flashlights which produces a flash for a very short duration are classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 9006 99 00 and not under 9405 40 10. Accordingly, Principal Commissioner cannot discard order of Commissioner (A) and Joint Commissioner to reclassify the goods.
