Direct Tax Basket 2014-TIOL-1875-HC-DEL-IT ACEE Enterprises Vs CIT Income Tax - CBDT Circular No 4 of 2007. Keywords - investment in shares - LTCG - stock in trade - STCG Whether an order passed by the appellate authorities can raise a question of law, when the Tribunal had not referred to the factual matrix relating to the relevant years but had simply followed its previous AYs order. - Case remanded : DELHI HIGH COURT 2014-TIOL-1874-HC-MUM-IT CIT Vs M/s Fortune Hotels And Estates Pvt Ltd Income Tax - Sections 50C, 52C(2) & 271(1)(c). Keywords - deemed income - market value - penalty - stamp valuation - sales consideration - transfer. Whether it can be said that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income whereas the fact is that the assessee has submitted registered sale deed along with consideration mentioned therein. - Revenues appeal dismissed : BOMBAY HIGH COURT 2014-TIOL-1873-HC-KAR-IT CIT Vs Shri G P Goyal Income Tax - Section 158BB. Keywords - incriminating material - undisclosed income - unexplained investment. Whether order passed by the Tribunal without looking into Section 158BB(1) for the computation of undisclosed income of the block period, can be sustained when it is made clear in the provision that undisclosed income shall be as defined under Section 158BA & 158BB and other documents and such other materials or information as available. - Revenues appeal allowed : KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 2014-TIOL-1872-HC-AHM-IT Kosha Cubidor Containers Ltd Vs DCIT Income Tax - Keywords - depriciation - purpose of business. Whether the assessee is entitled to claim depriciation if there is use of plant and machinery for the purpose of business, without taking into consideration that there must be optimum production to claim the same. - Assessees appeal allowed : GUJARAT HIGH COURT 2014-TIOL-789-ITAT-MUM + Story CIT Vs M/s Reliance Share And Stock Brokers (P) Ltd Income Tax - Sections 14A, 37(1), Rule 8D(2)(i) - Securities and Exchange Board of India Act - Section 11, 15E, 15F, 15G, 15H, 15I, 24 & 24A. Keywords - broking license - business expenditure - consent order - consent fees - technical violation. Whether the requirement of making disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) would arise only if the nexus between the borrowings and investments could not be clearly established - Whether therefore disallowance u/s 14A can be made, when the assessee has clearly established the nexus between the borrowings and investment - Whether the AO has to first examine the disallowance made by the assessee with respect to the accounts of the assessee and only thereafter, if not satisfied with the correctness of the claim, it can invoke Section 14A - Whether section 14A can be invoked when the assessees calculation for interest disallowance was not examined at all by the AO - Whether amount paid towards a consent scheme of the SEBI for compromising a dispute to carry on business without interruption, can be allowed as business expenditure, when under such scheme the assessee has neither admitted nor denied its alleged charges - Whether such fee paid can be equated to a “penalty” which must necessarily be a punishment for infraction of a law or a regulation having statutory force. - Revenues appeal dismissed : MUMBAI ITAT 2014-TIOL-788-ITAT-DEL ITO Vs Shri Anoop Khandelwal Income tax - Section 40(a)(ia). Keywords - brokerage expenses - discount - interest - rebate & TDS. Whether when there are conflicting judgments of various High Courts on a particular issue and one of the judgments has been confirmed by the Supreme Court, the assessee is said to be entitled for claiming benefit of that decision which is confirmed by the Supreme Court. - Revenues appeal dismissed : DELHI ITAT 2014-TIOL-787-ITAT-LKW ITO Vs Shri Rais Iqbal Income Tax – Section 69. Keywords - agricultural income - sale agreement - unexplained investment. Whether, if the assessee does not earn any agricultural income, as he has not shown in his return of income, the benefit of earning of agricultural income by the family cannot be given to the assessee in the absence of documentary evidence - Whether the sale agreement executed on a plain paper cannot constitute valid evidence and the same cannot be termed as ownership document of the property for the purpose of income tax. - Revenue’s appeal partly allowed : LUCKNOW ITAT Indirect Tax Basket SERVICE TAX SECTION 2014-TIOL-2130-CESTAT-MUM Akshay Engineers Vs CCE ST - Appellant is undertaking certain survey and related activities in respect of construction of roads under the Pradhan Mantris Gramin Sadak Yojana - appellant undertaking the activities which involves soil investigation, traffic survey, pavement design - activity undertaken by the appellant has a direct bearing on the construction of roads - In the case of Nokia (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Delhi - 2006-TIOL-169-CESTAT-DEL it is had held that technical assistance rendered in relation to advice or consultancy would also fall within the purview of ‘consulting engineering service - merit in the contention of the appellant that the demand is time-barred as the issue involved interpretation of the statutory provisions - appellant is directed to make a pre-deposit of Rs.3 lakhs and report compliance : CESTAT [Para 5.3, 6] - Pre-deposit ordered : MUMBAI CESTAT 2014-TIOL-2129-CESTAT-BANG Country Club (India) Ltd Vs CCE, C & ST Service Tax – Club or association service – Membership with land category – Cost of the land recovered from member and transferred to Clubs own Real Estate Company – Held, not liable to be included in the assessable value only on proof of sale deed reflecting actual amount collected towards cost of land – However, if the actual amount reflected in the sale deed is less than what is shown as transferred, that would amount to collection of membership fee in the name of land and Club would be liable to service tax on membership fee for the relevant period – Remanded to the original authority to verify the correctness of the claim regarding cost of land collected vis-à-vis sale deeds executed. - Appeal allowed : BANGALORE CESTAT 2014-TIOL-2128-CESTAT-BANG Gangireddy Shipping Vs CCE, C & ST Service Tax – Composite transactions – Taxability – Appellant engaged in series of activities of handling of fertilizers within the port, transportation from port to outside the port and bagging fertilizer – Invoices indicated that amount was charged separately for individual services contracted and provided by the service provider – appellant is paying service tax under the category of Port Service in respect of handling of fertilizers within the port – And transportation being a distinct activity amount received towards transportation rightly discharged under GTA services – Thus said services cannot be treated as a composite transactions/services – Prima-facie case in favor of assessee – Pre-deposit is waived. - Stay Ordered : BANGALORE CESTAT 2014-TIOL-2127-CESTAT-BANG Shivanssh Infrastructure Development Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, C & ST Service Tax - Construction Service - Tax liability - Construction of residential quarters for military personnel intended for personal use and occupation - Cannot be considered as residential complex service - End use of the residential complex is not covered by the definition of residential complex - Issue of works contract service either by principal contractor or by sub-contractor becomes irrelevant - Good prima-facie case in favor of assessee - Pre-deposit waived. : BANGALORE CESTAT 2014-TIOL-2126-CESTAT-BANG M/s Tanla Solutions Ltd Vs CC, CE & ST Service Tax - CENVAT Credit - Insurance Services - Availment of credit on - Whether any recovery has been made from the employees for providing the benefit and whether family members of the employees are included in the insurance need to be determined - Matter remanded. Service Tax - CENVAT Credit - Claim disallowed on ground that classification of service not mentioned in the invoice/bill - Though not an essential requirement to decide nexus and eligibility, classification would be necessary to determine the nature of input service and under which head tax was paid - Remanded for fresh adjudication - Since substantial amount in question already paid, Pre-deposit waived. : BANGALORE CESTAT CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION 2014-TIOL-2136-CESTAT-DEL + Story M/s Brindavan Beverages Pvt Ltd Vs CCE Central Excise - CENVAT Credit on capital goods used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted goods - Contention that the appellant though used the capital goods initially for manufacture of exempted goods (Maaza), they had the intention to manufacture dutiable goods also using the same capital goods after minor modification and software change - Credit denied by the department by invoking Rule 6(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Upheld by the Tribunal and remanded by the High Court on appeal by the assessee. - Matter remanded : DELHI CESTAT 2014-TIOL-2135-CESTAT-BANG CCE, CC & ST Vs Delta Park Aqua Central Excise – 100% EOU – Penalty proceedings for failure to utilize goods imported/sourced indigenously for the purpose of production of export goods – Sustainability – 5.31% of export obligation has already been fulfilled – No evidence to show that this achievement was made without using goods imported/sourced indigenously – Observation of Commissioner (Appeals) that consumables were consumed in the circumstances has to be accepted – Consequently revenue contention that depreciation is not admissible without goods being put to use, is rejected. - Appeal rejected : BANGALORE CESTAT 2014-TIOL-2134-CESTAT-MAD IM Gears Pvt Ltd Vs CCE Central Excise – Stay / Dispensation of pre deposit – CENVAT credit – Input service credit under Rule 2(l) of CCR 2004 on Courier Service used for export of goods denied in adjudication, demand for recovery upheld by Commissioner (Appeals) and agitated herein. - Stay granted : CHENNAI CESTAT 2014-TIOL-2133-CESTAT-MAD M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd Vs CCE Central Excise - Opportunity for hearing - Adjudicating authority finalized assessments consequent to Tribunal remand, the same was agitated by Revenue before Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the departmental appeal without hearing the Party, on the ground that since no cross objections were filed, the departments contentions were unrebutted - now agitated by the Party herein. - Matter remanded : CHENNAI CESTAT CUSTOMS SECTION 2014-TIOL-2132-CESTAT-MUM + Story CC Vs Adani Exports Ltd Customs - Refund - respondents imported Coal in bulk; BE assessed provisionally under PD Bond subsequently finalized resulting in filing of refund claim, rejected by original authority on limitation - Relief granted by Commissioner (Appeals), agitated by Revenue herein. - Appeals allowed : MUMBAI CESTAT 2014-TIOL-2131-CESTAT-MAD CC Vs Adani Exports Ltd Customs - Refund - respondents imported Coal in bulk; BE assessed provisionally under PD Bond subsequently finalized resulting in filing of refund claim, rejected by original authority on limitation - Relief granted by Commissioner (Appeals), agitated by Revenue herein. - Appeal Rejected : CHENNAI CESTAT
Posted on: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 09:45:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015