|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 281 to 300 of 1010 Records
-
2011 (7) TMI 1121 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... e for exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed accordingly.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1120 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... e charges, which is optional, are to be added to the assessable value of the vehicles. We find this issue is already settled against the revenue in the above noted decision of the Tribunal. The appeal filed by the revenue against the decision of the Tribunal is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported as 2009 (240) E.L.T. A82. 3. In view of the earlier decision of the Tribunal which is on the same issue and in respect of the same assessee, we find no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. (Pronounced & dictated in open Court)
-
2011 (7) TMI 1119 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ether the Learned Commissioner has condoned the delay. The AO will pass appropriate order afresh on this issue after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes on this issue. 6. The last ground No. 6 is against not granting of relief in respect of the directions of Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) in the first round in the computation of income now determined. This appeal arises in respect of the grounds set aside by the Tribunal in the earlier round in ITA No 7258/M/02 dt.22.12.05. Therefore the giving effect to order of the Ld. CIT(A) is not on appeal before us. The AO shall give effect to the relief granted by the appellate authorities earlier, while passing an order giving effect to this order of the Tribunal. With this observation, the appeal filed by the assessee on this issue is dismissed. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1118 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... chnical services that whether any human intervention was involved in the activity or not. The apex Court observed that wherever there was human intervention requiring examination of technical data, the same would fall within the definition of technical services and in the absence thereof, the same would not partake the character of technical services. The apex Court in that case had remitted the matter to the AO to examine the technical expert and after examining him adjudicate the matter afresh. In the present case as well from the perusal of the orders of the authorities below, it is not discernible whether there was any intervention of the human element in the services provided to the assessee. 10. Accordingly, while setting aside the order of the authorities below, the matter is remitted to the AO to examine afresh in the light of the observations made by the apex Court in Bharti Cellular Ltd.'s case (supra) noted above. 11. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1117 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Assessing Officer that though the nature of work was known to the Revenue but the fact that ‘Fin Tubes’ and ‘Bend Tubes’, manufactured by the respondent/assessee, were being used for repair of the Air Coolers, was not known. At the same time, there was no dispute that reversal of credit taken on inputs Pipes was being done concurrently under MODVAT. In that background, the Tribunal held that the Revenue was 2 aware of the nature of work being carried out as well as inputs, as were being used, at the time when the repair works were being carried out and, accordingly, the demand under Section 11-A of the Act could only be raised within one year from the date of removal and not within the extended period, as is permissible under proviso to the said Section. The matter, having been decided on facts, to which there appears to be no dispute, no substantial question of law arises in the appeal. We, accordingly dispose of the appeal without any interference.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1116 - SUPREME COURT
Job worker – liability of pay excise duty – receipt of material under 57F(2) / 57F(4) challans – It is the case of the Revenue that the job worker would be liable to pay central excise duty, specially, when he has received the raw material against the challan under rule 57F(2) of the Rules and not the final manufacturer of the end product.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1115 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... (2) ING Vysya Bank Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 2006 6 SOT 606 (Bang.) 17. Considering the above discussion, it is held that the assessee is entitled to value all the investment at cost prices or market value whichever is lower by treating such investment as stock-in-trade……” 5. As the issue involved in the present case as well as all the material facts relevant thereto are similar to the cases of State Bank of Mysore and Vijaya Bank (supra), we respectfully follow the decision of the Tribunal in the said cases and hold that the claim of the assessee for a loss of ₹ 87.11 lakhs on the transfer of securities from “Available for Sale” category to “Held to Maturity” category is an allowable claim. The impugned order of the learned CIT passed u/s 263 on this issue is accordingly set aside and that of the AO is restored. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above. Order pronounced on this 15th day of July, 2011.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1114 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... the Tribunal on 1st November, 2010 and makes the requisite deposit within four weeks from today, the appeal filed by the petitioner shall be decided on merits.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1113 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... a Larger Bench and that is how it has been placed before us. Mr.Sahni, learned counsel for the revenue, stated that the Central Board of Direct Taxes is already seized of the matter and there is a possibility that some kind of solution can be arrived at. In view of the aforesaid, as advised at present, we are not inclined to keep this matter pending. We hope and trust the Central Board of Direct Taxes shall apprise itself with regard to the issues raised and the institutions involved and take a decision regard being had to the scheme of the Act within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order passed today. Till such a decision is taken, the interim order passed on earlier occasion shall remain in force. Needless to emphasise if the petitioner would be grieved by the decision taken by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, it can always approach this Court challenging the same. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1112 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ay condoned. This appeal is dismissed.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1111 - SC ORDER
Waiver of pre deposit - Demand of duty - If the duty is illegally paid on the parts, then such a duty paid illegally would have to be refunded.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1110 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ultimately be appropriated by the company. Insofar as present case is concerned, we do not see how this factor would make any significant difference. Interest earned from share application money statutorily required to be kept in separate account was being adjusted towards the cost of raising share capital. In that view of the matter, we have formed an opinion that tribunal was justified in granting such deduction. 13.Insofar as question no.(2) is concerned, we find that the tribunal was of the opinion that reopening under Section 147 of the Act would not be permissible on a mere change of opinion even after the amendment with effect from 1.4.1989. This proposition is by now well settled and is not seriously disputed by the counsel for the Revenue also. When tribunal came to the conclusion that previously the Assessing Officer had already examined the issue, reopening thereof under Section 147 of the Act thereof was not permissible. 14.In the result, tax appeal is dismissed.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1109 - SUPREME COURT
Can a party who does not comply with the court order be permitted to retain the benefits of his own wrong of non-compliance?
Whether the successful party be not compensated by way of restitution for deprivation of its legitimate dues for more than fourteen years?
Whether the court should not remove all incentives for not complying with the judgment of the court?
-
2011 (7) TMI 1108 - ITAT MUMBAI
Income accrued in India - Remittances of conferanace Expenses paid to Non - Resident - Tax Deducted at Source u/s 195 - Consequences of failure to pay u/s 201/201A- "Consultancy services" - technical nature - Article 12 of Indo-US Tax Treaty - AO observed that before making payment to non-resident, the assessee-company had not deducted tax at source as required by section 195 - HELD THAT:- Nature of services rendered by non resident company to the assessee-company is such that the same cannot be regarded as technical or consultancy services so as to fall within the definition of "fees for included services" as given in Article 12 of the Indo-US Tax Treaty.
The payment made for the said services, thus, is in the nature of business profits in the hands of non resident company as covered under Article 7 of the Treaty and the said party admittedly having no PE in India in the year under consideration, the same was not chargeable to tax in its hand in India. Consequently, the assessee-company was not liable to deduct tax at source from the said payment made to non resident company and no liability could be fastened on it under section 201/201(1A).
We, therefore, reverse the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) upholding the order passed by the Assessing Officer on this issue under section 201/201(1A) and allow the appeal of the assessee - Decision in favour of Assessee.
"Fees for included services" under Article 12(4) of the DTAA - Remittances made to the CROs - Assessee paid fees to CROs (Non- resident entities) in respect of bio-equivalence studies, clinical/analytical charge - HELD THAT:- In the case of ANAPHARM INC., IN RE [2008 (9) TMI 27 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS], a similar issue had come up wherein the non-resident assessee had received similar payments from Indian pharma companies for providing services of CROs and the question was whether the said payments are taxable in India AND held services rendered by the non-resident assessee as CROs were not for fees for included services as they did not make available any technology to the recipient.
Therefore, we are in the view that the nature of services rendered by CROs to the assessee-company is such that the same cannot be regarded as technical or consultancy services so as to fall within the definition of "fees for included services" and the payment made for such services, therefore, was not chargeable to tax in India in the hands of the concerned CROs. Consequently, the assessee-company was not liable to deduct tax at source from the said payment made to CROs and no liability could be fastened on it under section 201/201(1A) - dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1107 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e petition is disposed of with following directions (i) The petitioner shall deposit sum of ₹ 1 crore with the respondent authorities latest by 10-8-2011. (ii) Further sum of ₹ 1.50 crores will be deposited latest by 15-9-2011. (iii) On the premise that such deposits will be made as provided here-in-above, appeals of the petitioners shall be heard on merits by the Tribunal and disposed of in accordance with law. 9. It is clarified that the appeals shall be entertained only after verifying that the amounts as directed here-in-above have been deposited. It is further clarified that in case within the time permitted, such amounts are not deposited the petitioners’ appeals shall stand automatically dismissed without any further reference to this Court. 10. It is further clarified that in the meantime there is no stay against recovery of outstanding dues and condition of pre-deposit is for hearing the appeals of the petitioners on merits before CESTAT.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1106 - CESTAT CHENNAI
Export of Red Sanders - Misdeclaration of export goods - Smuggling - prohibited Item - Red Sanders - goods were declared as safety matches for export to Sri Lanka - absolute confiscation - Penalty - Held that:- both the appellants were involved in the attempted illicit export of Red sanders. Shri Sakthi and Shri Ramasubbu were very much involved in the plan for exporting red sanders and the stuffing of red sanders after unloading safety matches. Shri Sakthi also received part of the amount for smuggling red sanders. Shri Ramasubbu arranged for the CHA with the full knowledge that red sanders, a prohibited item was going to be exported. Both of them have also confessed their roles in statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, which are admissible as evidence in proceedings against them - the adjudicating Commissioner was right in coming to the conclusion that both the appellants herein were liable to penal action for their involvement in the illicit export of red sanders which is a prohibited item.
Penalty of ₹ 7.5 lakhs against Shri Sakthi - Held that:- Considering the fact that the value of red sanders sought to be illicitly exported was about ₹ 75 lakhs and considering the role and involvement of Shri Sakthi in the entire case, we are of the view that the penalty imposed on him cannot be said to be disproportionate - penalty upheld.
Penalty of ₹ 7.5 lakhs on Shri Ramasubbu @ Ramesh - Held that:- Considering the comparative role of Shri Sakthi and Shri Ramasubbu, we are of the considered view that ends of justice will be met if the penalty imposed on Shri Ramasubbu is kept a little lower than that what has been imposed on Shri Sakthi - quantum of penalty on Shri Ramasubbu @ Ramesh is reduced to ₹ 5 lakhs.
Appeal allowed in part.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1105 - SUPREME COURT
Whether illegal recovery can be the foundation of a successful conviction under the provisions of Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985?
-
2011 (7) TMI 1104 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... circumstances, the CESTAT accepted the factual finding given by the original authority as confirmed by the appellate authority. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. 5. The order passed by the original authority as confirmed by the appellate authority and the CESTAT clearly shows that it was only on the basis of the factual adjudication, the issue was decided against the appellant. The three fact-finding authorities have clearly stated that the protective coating was totally absent and as such, the claim made by the appellant on the basis of exemption notification was not valid. The Tribunal, being the final fact-finding authority, decided the issue on the basis of evidence. Therefore, there is no question of law, much less substantial question of law involved in this matter so as to enable this Court to entertain the appeal. 6. Accordingly, we dismiss the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is also dismissed.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1103 - SC ORDER
Demand of Interest – provisional assessment - differential duty was paid prior to the date of final assessment.
-
2011 (7) TMI 1102 - SC ORDER
Cenvat Credit- The appellants received Carbon-di-oxide gas from M/s. Madras Fertilizers, through pipeline which is stored and compressed and subsequently filled in cylinders. Cylinders carry the buyers name “PILLAY” apart from the particulars of gross weight and net weight.
............
|
