Month: June 2018

AAR-Karnataka : Where applicant has manufacturing arrangement with contract brewing/bottling units (CBU) who manufacture brands of beer belonging to applicant and supply such beer to market by procuring raw materials, packaging materials, incurring overheads and other manufacturing costs etc. on its own and sell beer directly, since material is purchased by CBUs and ownership of raw material required to manufacture beer rests with manufacturer and not with applicant, manufacturing activity undertaken by CBUs does not qualify classification under Heading 9988, as a result CBUs are not engaged in supply of any service to applicant

Authority For Advance Rulings, Karnataka United Breweries Ltd., In re Harish Dharnia And Dr. Ravi Prasad, Member Advance Ruling No. Kar Adrg 9 Of 2018 June  29, 2018  K.S. Ramesh, Advocate and Govind Iyengar, Sr. Vice-President  for the Respondent. RULING 1. M/s United Breweries Limited, 20th Mile, Tumkur Road, Nelamangala, Bangalore Rural, Karnataka – 562 123, …

Bombay H.C : The petitioners that they are not in possession of Aadhar cards and/or Adhar enrollment numbers, resulting in not being able to file their Returns of Income for he assessment years 2018-19

High Court Of Bombay Hussain Indorewala And Ors. vs. Union Of India And Ors. Referred to Section : 139AA; Rule 12(3) Asst. Year : 2018-19 M.S. Sanklecha & Sandeep K. Shinde, JJ. Writ Petition No. 1709 OF 2018 29th June, 2018 Counsel appeared: Sanjay Singhvi, SC a/w Rahul Kamerkar I/b Mihir Joshi for the Assessee.: Anil …

Bombay H.C : The Tribunal was justified in deleting the disallowance made u/s 37(1) without appreciating he facts of the case and legal matrix as clearly brought out by the AO and the CIT(A)

High Court Of Bombay Pr. CIT vs. Quest Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd. Section 260A, 37(1) Asst. Year 2008-09 M. S. Sanklecha & Sandeep K. Shinde, JJ. Income Tax Appeal No. 280 OF 2016 28th June, 2018 Counsel Appeared: N.C. Mohanty for the Petitioner.: Ajaykumar R. Singh for the Respondent PC. 1. This appeal under Section 260A …

Madras H.C : The Assessing Officer under the provisions of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), directing the petitioner to pay 20% of the tax demanded from the petitioner for the assessment year 2015-16

High Court Of Madras Samms Juke Box vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Section 143(3) , 157, 220(6) Asst. Year 2015-16 T. S. Sivagnanam, J. Writ Petition No. 3735 of 2018 and W.M.P. No. 4550 of 2018 28th June, 2018 Counsel Appeared: M. V. Swaroop for the Petitioner.: Rajkumar Jhabkh, J. Narayanaswamy for the Respondent ORDER …

Bombay H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is justified in law in excluding M/s. E Zest Solutions Ltd , M/s. FCS Software Ltd., M/s. KALS information Systems Ltd. and M/s. Bodhtree Consulting Ltd. from the set of omparables selected by the TPO ?

High Court Of Bombay Pr. CIT vs. Barclays Technology Centre India Private Ltd. Section 260A Asst. Year 2008-09 M. S. Sanklecha & Sandeep K. Shinde, JJ. Income Tax Appeal No. 1384 OF 2015 26th June, 2018 Counsel Appeared: Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.: Nishant Thakkar with Jasmin Amalsadvala i/by PDS Legal, Advocates for the Respondent PC: …

Karnataka H.C : Depreciation charged and deducted only 10% of such Depreciation for arriving at the PLI. Because of this adjustment, operation loss of 2.70% became positive operating profit of 1. 78%

High Court Of Karnataka Indigra Exports Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT Dr. Vineet Kothari & S. Sujatha, JJ. Section 260-A Asst. Year 2010-11 ITA No. 235/2016 26th June, 2018 Counsel appeared: Cbythanya K.K. Advocate for the Petitioner.: K.V. Aravind, Advocate for the Respondent DR. VINEET KOTHARI, J. The Assessee -M/s. Indigra Exports Private Limited, Bangalore has filed …

Kerala H.C : The Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law and on facts in upholding the order of the lower authorities, by finding that Rule 9B(4) would not entitl the appellant to claim deduction in respect of expenditure of acquisition of distribution rights of feature film during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2005-06

High Court Of Kerala Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Section Rule 9B of Income Tax Rules Asst. Year 2005-06 K.Vinod Chandran & Ashok Menon, JJ. ITA.No. 80 of 2010 26th June, 2018 Counsel appeared: E.K. Nandakumar, P. Benny Thomas, P.Gopinath, K.John Mathai, Raja Kannan for the Petitioner.: P.K.R. Menon, Sr. Counsel, …

Karnataka H.C : whether the working has been robust based on historical data, whether there is minimal reversals whether the estimates are reduced as one approaches the end of the warranty period and whether any detail assessment of the warranty provisions had been done?

High Court Of Karnataka Pr.CIT (CIT-A) And Anr. vs. Acer India Pvt. Ltd. Section 260A, 37 Vineet Kothari & S. Sujatha, JJ. ITA No. 431/2017 25th June, 2018 Counsel appeared: K.V. Aravind, Adv. for the Petitioner.: Ankur Pai, Adv. for the Respondent Dr. Vineet Kothari, J. The Revenue has filed this appeal u/s 260-A of the …

Kerala H.C : The appellant is a person against whom a red corner notice was issued through Interpol, upon which he returned to India and was arrested from the Cochin International Airport by the investigating agency

High Court Of Kerala Mailakkattu Varghese Uthup vs. Pr.CIT And Others Section 230 Asst. Year 2009-10 to 2015-16 K.Vinod Chandran & Ashok Menon, JJ. W.A.No.1180 of 2018 25th June, 2018 Counsel Appeared: Joseph Markos (Sr Advocate) & Preetha S. Nair for the Appellant. : STANDING COUNSEL FOR GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (TAXES) Jose Joseph & ASG OF …
Malcare WordPress Security