Recent Judgement

0
270

In favour of: Assessee

Addition could not be made merely on basis of difference in closing stock based on stock statement furnished to bankers which did not give any discrepancy of quantity of item-wise stock which was given to bankers solely for purpose of credit limit.

Delhi Tribunal
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS. VS ASHWANI KUMAR & CO. PVT. LTD. & ORS. : (2017) 51 CCH 0468 DelTrib
Decided On: Nov 30, 2017

CAPITAL GAINS
In favour of: Revenue

Amendment brought in by Finance Act of 2017, by way of insertion of sub-section (5A) to s.45 was prospective in operation.

Hyderabad Tribunal
G. SAILAJA VS INCOME TAX OFFICER : (2017) 51 CCH 0470 HydTrib
Decided On: Nov 30, 2017

TRANSFER PRICING ADJUSTMENT
In favour of: Assessee

Functionally different companies cannot be selected as comparables.

High Court Of Delhi
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. VS B.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD. & ANR : (2017) 100 CCH 0110 DelHC
Decided On: Nov 28, 2017

NON-RESIDENTS
In favour of: Assessee(partly)

The activity of hiring Ships by the user for transporting men/machines to locations where it was doing exploration/production of mineral oil is directly and closely related with ‘services’rendered by plant and machinery and the income arising out of such activities has to be assessed u/s. section 44BB and not u/s. 44B of the Act.

Bombay Tribunal
SWIWAR OFFSHORE PTE. LTD. & ANR. VS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNAIONAL TAXATION) & ANR. : (2017) 51 CCH 0471 MumTrib
Decided On: Nov 30, 2017

Indirect Tax Update

December 06, 2017

INPUT SERVICES
In favour of: Assessee

In absence of statutory provision which prescribed that registration was mandatory and that if such registration was not made assessee was not entitled to benefit of refund, three authorities committed serious error in rejecting claim for refund on ground which was not existent in law.

Cestat Bangalore
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, BANGALORE NORTH VS SLK GLOBAL BPO SERVICES PVT. LTD. : (2017) 24 CCHST 1711 BangTrib
Decided On: Oct 24, 2017

TAXABLE SERVICE
In favour of: Assessee(by remand)

When very scope and ambit of Notification No. 22/2006-ST was under sub-judice before Apex Court, it was premature on part of Tribunal to overreach jurisdiction of Apex Court.

Cestat Mumbai
M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA VS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX-I, MUMBAI : (2017) 24 CCHST 1712 MumTrib
Decided On: Oct 24, 2017

DELETION OF INTEREST RELIEF
In favour of: Assessee

Interest on delayed refund was payable u/s 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944 on expiring of period of three months from date of receipt of application u/s 11B(1) ibid and not from date of order of refund or Appellate Order allowing such refund.

Cestat Bangalore
XEROX BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD. VS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX COCHIN : (2017) 24 CCHST 1713 BangTrib
Decided On: Oct 25, 2017

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here