Month: November 2017

CESTAT-Chandigarh : Where some activities, namely, cutting, punching, welding, drilling and bending were undertaken by job worker on steel items, said activities did not amount to manufacture

CESTAT, Chandigarh Bench Leotronics Scales (P.) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandha Ashok Jindal, Judicial Member And Devender Singh, Technical Member Section 2(72) Period June, 2005 to February, 2006 Final Order No. 62091 Of 2017 Appeal No. E/2618 Of 2007 November  30, 2017 Circulars and Notifications: Notification No. 8/2003-CE, dated 1-3-2003 and Notification No. 214/86-CE, …

Himachal Pradesh H.C : an ‘undertaking or an enterprise’ established after 7-1-2003 and carried out ‘substantial expansion’ within specified window period, i.e., between 7-1-2003 and 1-4-2012, would be entitled to deduction on profits at rate of 100 per cent, under section 80-IC post said expansion

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh Stovekraft India vs. CIT Section 80-IC Assessment year 2006-07 Sanjay Karol, Actg. CJ. And Ajay Mohan Goel, J. IT Appeal Nos. 20 To 24, 31 To 37 Of 2015, & 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14, 15, 20, 23, 24, 25, 27, 35, 44, 45, 50, 61, 62, 69, 70 Of …

S.C : Whether the assessee is entitled to claim deduction under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the excise duty paid in advance in the Personal Ledger Account (“PLA” for short)?

Supreme Court Of India CIT-II Vs. Modipon Ltd. Section 43B Assessment years 1993-94, 1996-1997 to 1998-99 Ranjan Gogoi And Navin Sinha, JJ. Civil Appeal Nos. 19763, 19767 To 19770 Of 2017 November  24, 2017  JUDGMENT Ranjan Gogoi, J. – Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions. 2. Four of the present appeals involve the same …

Allahabad H.C : The petitioner filed its e-return of income disclosing total income Rs.24,18,597/-. Upon scrutiny assessment being made under Section 143 (3)

High Court Of Allahabad Kanpur Texel Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT & Anr. Section 147, 148 Asst. Year 2009-10 Bharati Sapru & Saumitra Dayal Singh, JJ. WRIT TAX No. 812 of 2016 23rd November, 2017 Counsel Appeared: Suyash Agarwal for the Petitioner.: Praveen Kumar for the Respondent SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. Heard Shri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal, learned …

S.C : This Circular should not be applied by the High Courts ipso facto when matter had a cascading effect and where common principles may be involved in subsequent group of matters or a large number of matters

Supreme Court Of India Director of Income Tax, Circle 26(1), New Delhi Vs. S.R.M.B. Dairy Farming (P.) Ltd. Section 268A, 260A Rohinton Fali Nariman And Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ. Civil Appeal (No.) 19650 Of 2017 November 23, 2017 JUDGMENT Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. – Leave granted. 2. The propensity of Government Departments and public authorities to …

Bombay H.C : Where President of VAT Tribunal on reference made by a Bench of two members constituted a Larger Bench consisting of himself and two other members and thereafter passed an order that reference to a Bench of three members was unwarranted, said order was completely illegal

High Court Of Bombay Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund vs. State of Maharashtra Section : 109 S. Oka And A.K. Menon, JJ. Maharashtra Value Added Tax Appeal No. 46 Of 2017 November  22, 2017 JUDGMENT A.S. Oka, J. – Appeal was admitted by order dated 3rd October, 2017 and was immediately fixed for hearing. The question of …

Allahabad H.C : The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was confirmed the action of the CIT invoking the jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act on the facts and circumstances of the case

High Court Of Allahabad Sunil Kumar Rastogi vs. CIT Section 260A Asst. Year 2001-02 Bharati Sapru & Saumitra Dayal Singh, JJ. Income Tax Appeal No. -237 of 2011 22nd November, 2017 Counsel Appeared: Rakesh Ranjan Agarwal, Suyash Agarwal for the Appellant. : C.S.C., A.N.Mahajan, Gaurav Mahajan, S.S.C. I.T. for the Respondent. ORDER: Heard Shri Suyash Agrawal, …
Malcare WordPress Security