New User / Register || Book Marks || Annual Subscription || Feed Back ||
Login: Stay
|| Forget Password ||
     
TMI - Tax Management India. Com  

Recent Discussionss:

Franchise fee Service tax RCM Excise Duty Applicable reconcile er1 returns with trial balance/balancesheet Sale of Machinery by SEZ Unit to EOU Two companies in different states c form issued with purchase value excluding cst2% tax amt input tax credit vat annual return filling Import license for restricted items
Search in Case Laws

Refine Search / Filter

Case Laws
Text
Search as Search in: -

Filter [Optional]
Include In:
Date From To DD-MM-YYYY
Law - Section [Only for Income Tax]
Court - City
Exclude

OR
TMI Citation
or TMI - ID

To use various search filters - clik the link Refine Search / Filter above

Search Results

Showing 1301 to 1315 of 6645 Records

   

1301

2009 (9) TMI 189 - CESTAT, CHENNAI

COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., PONDICHERRY Versus AURORE TRUST

Adjustment of tax - The assessees who are providing commissioning and installation service had collected service tax for services provided by them during the period May to June, 2003 during which commissioning and installation was not a taxable servi ......

1302

2009 (9) TMI 669 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Super Spinning Mills Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirupathi

Services received out of India- The assessee has been getting export orders from abroad through some agents stationed outside India. These agents provide the service of procuring export orders for the assessee. Intelligence further revealed that the ......

1303

2009 (9) TMI 658 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI Versus EICHER LTD.

Whether the clause (I) to Rule 57AE of the Rules introduced by the Notification No. 51/2000-C.E. (N.T.), dated 29-8-2001 is clarificatory and procedural in nature and has retrospective application - Whether a certificate issued under Rule 57E for dif ......

1304

2009 (9) TMI 840 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

COMMISSIONER OF CUS. & C. EX., RAIPUR Versus BHILAI STEEL PLANT

..... y used in manufacturing cement, railway track materials needed for transporting fuel, are essential for manufacturing process, then such component and parts of machine would be eligible for Modvat credit. All these cases were decided on the basis of facts of each of the cases and the materials on record being sufficient to establish the claim. Being so, they are of no help in the matter in hand at this stage. 37. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Whether the respondents are entitled for credit in terms of Rule 57Q or Rule 57A in relation to each of the items will have to be decided by the Commissioner (Appeals) after going through the materials on record. 38. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned order is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the same afresh bearing in mind the observations made above. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.

1305

2009 (9) TMI 384 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI

PRAGATI SILICONES PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., PANCHKULA

Classification- The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of name plates, labels, emblems and logos made up of plastic material. The appellants claimed classification under Chapter sub-headings 87.08 and 87.14 of the Tariff as accessories for exc ......

1306

2009 (9) TMI 66 - SUPREME COURT

Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore Versus M/s Textool Co. Ltd.

Deduction u/s 36(1)(v) amount paid directly to Life Insurance Corporation towards Group Gratuity Fund held that - True that a fiscal statute is to be construed strictly and nothing should be added or subtracted to the language employed in the Se ......

1307

2009 (9) TMI 156 - CESTAT, MUMBAI

HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORP. LTD. Versus CC (ADJ.), MUMBAI

Order of Confiscation of the imported ATM machines and terminal computers Final disposal of appeal itself not proper at stay stage - misdeclaration of value and fraud statements accepting misdeclaration not retracted undervaluation not challeng ......

1308

2009 (9) TMI 742 - CESTAT BANGALORE

DECCAN SECURITY SERVICES Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., GUNTUR

..... the appellants had rendered taxable service during the material period. The appellants were registered with the Department as provider of taxable service on 11-12-2002 but did not discharge tax liability even subsequent to that date. The appellants rsquo case is that they failed to discharge the tax on account of ignorance of the tax liability. We find that this plea had not been canvassed before the lower authority. In the circumstances, we find that the appellants have not made out a prima facie case for granting complete waiver of dues. Considering the deposit of Rs. 13,602/- already made by the appellants, we order that the appellants to pre-deposit a further amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only) within a period of three weeks from today and report compliance on 9th November, 2009. On reporting such compliance, there shall be waiver of pre-deposit of balance dues and stay of recovery thereof pending decision in the appeal. (Pronounced and dictated in the court)

1309

2009 (9) TMI 749 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Varun Finstock Pvt. Ltd.

..... particulars have not been furnished in a correct/exact manner as is required to be furnished to determine the correct income of the assessee chargeable to tax. At the time when the return was filed by the assessee, can the particulars submitted by the assessee relating to the total income, be regarded to be incorrect. The claim made by the assessee is bona fide as there are two views possible on the applicability of section 73 of the Act. Merely that the claim of the assessee was not accepted does not mean that the assessee be penalised. In view of our aforesaid discussion, we are of the view that this is not a case where the assessee has submitted inaccurate particulars of his income while submitting the income-tax return and, therefore, we confirm the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleting the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c). In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. The order pronounced in the open court on September 4, 2009.

1310

2009 (9) TMI 83 - ITAT DELHI-D

Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax. Versus Jyoti Woollen Mills.

Income From Undisclosed Sources

..... ase it is not in dispute that the credit facility was extended by the bank to the assessee against hypothecation of stock and the valuation of the stock declared to the bank was higher than actual stock available in the books of accounts and this inflation of the stock was done by the assessee to obtain higher credit limit from the bank. Hence, in our opinion on the basis of the case law the CIT(A) in a well-reasoned order has rightly deleted the impugned addition because in the instant case the AO has not brought on record any evidence to show that the assessee was in fact in possession of higher quantity of stock, therefore, mere comparison of the stock declared to the bank and the one shown in the books of accounts the addition could not be made on the difference between the two. Accordingly, the order of CIT(A) in deleting the impugned addition is upheld and ground of appeal taken by the Revenue is rejected. 12. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

1311

2009 (9) TMI 573 - HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI

Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. Versus Delta Classic (P.) Ltd.

Offences and prosecution

..... erative to note that the complainant, nowhere, claims that he either entrusted the vehicle or any money with the accused company or its authorised agents or representatives inasmuch as the vehicle was, admittedly, taken possession of by the accused company and as far as the payments of money were concerned, the same were made by the complainant against his own outstanding dues. The complainant was, even according to the complaint, a defaulter and, in such circumstances, the mere fact that the accused-petitioners had taken possession of the vehicle and disposed of the same, in terms of the loan agreement, cannot be stretched, to hold, even tentatively, that the accused company has committed offence of criminal breach of trust . 29. In the result and for the reasons discussed above, the order, dated 7-8-2008, cannot, to the extent that it directs issuance of processes against the two accused-petitioners, be sustained and the same shall, accordingly, stand set aside and quashed.

1312

2009 (9) TMI 644 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B

Dharamshibhai B. Shah. Versus Income-Tax Officer.

Gift - Deemed gift - Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the AO under s. 15(3) r/w s. 16 of the GT Act; 1958, proposing gift-tax on a sum of Rs. 60,14,109 be quashed or it may be held that provisions contained in s. 4(1)( ......

1313

2009 (9) TMI 556 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA

Stay- Naphtha for fertilizers- two separate show-cause notices demanding very same duty were issued to recipient. Demand has been raised on the ground that much quantity of Naphtha not used for manufacture of fertilizers. Duty liability if end use co ......

1314

2009 (8) TMI 810 - ITAT PUNE-A

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited. Versus Additional Commissioner Of Income-Tax.

Computation of income of insurance business - Exemption - section 44 - applicability of s. 14A in respect of sale of investment which is not taxed under the special circumstances of deletion of a sub-rule from the statute. - s. 44 creates a special p ......

1315

2009 (8) TMI 785 - ITAT AGRA

Dr. GG. Dhir. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax.

Search U/s 132 Block Assessment Undisclosed income - Computerised documents as books of accounts computerized cash book - assessee produced computerized cash book in assessment proceedings. As the day to day availability of cash shown in the ca ......

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

what is new what is new

UpdatesKnowledge SharingSubscription CommunicationNewslettersMore Options

Go to Mobile Website Go To Top
© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.