Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 2007 2007 (9) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA Law of Competition PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 2 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 401 to 420 of 658 Records

• 2007 (9) TMI 262
  

  Dealer in shares - Additions to the income of assessee on account of the high price paid for the purchase of shares of erstwhile HCL – assessee had some special knowledge about the joint venture and the scheme of arrangement and was therefore, willing to pay a higher price to corner the shares - Explanation given by assessee was a plausible explanation and could not be termed perverse – ITAT and CIT (A) were right in examining the explanation and concluding that transactions were not sham – therefore amount could not be disallowed - in respect of valuation of closing stock, assessee rightly valued it at cost price or market price whichever is lower

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 261
  

  Business of setting up satellite business communication systems – Expenses incurred in the previous year during interregnum after the setting up of the business and before the commencement of business, all expenses would be permissible deduction - purchase order for equipment in July 1994 – installation of equipment completed in March 1995 – business should be held to have been set up on July 1994 – this was the relevant date for determining the nature of expenses incurred thereafter – expenditure on equipment deductible in A.Y. 1995-96 – revenue appeal dismissed

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 260
  

  In accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, the assessee applied to the HC for permission to reduce the share capital which was permitted - AO was of the view that the reduction of share capital did not represent a loss incurred by assessee and, therefore, taxed the amount - There is nothing to suggest that the assessee concealed any income or furnished any inaccurate particulars – since reduction of share capital approved by court, there was no any fraud or any gross or willful neglect on part of assessee – penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not leviable

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 259
  

  Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Revenue submits that the assessment order indicates the satisfaction of the AO regarding the concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars by the assessee - recording by the AO in the last part of the assessment order satisfies the requirement of the law - AO has also made a note of the failure on the part of the assessee to explain the source of credits in her bank account, and that she adduced no evidence to support the genuine-ness of such credits – revenue appeal allowed

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 258
  

  Reopening the assessment by issuance of a notice u/s 148 - notice after four years that speculative loss cannot be allowed to be set off against the business income of the assessee on ground that dealing in shares is not main business of assessee - Complete details of the sale and purchase of shares and the comparative figures of the earlier years had been given by the assessee to AO - reopening of the completed assessment is only as a result of change of opinion of the Assessing Officer - notice was clearly barred by limitation

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 257
  

  Refund – appellants were receiving only the commission for the service provided by them, which is based on the value and they were not receiving any service tax amount from the service receiver and hence incidence of service tax was borne by them only – passing of the tax incidence to the clients does not arise - held that unjust enrichment will not apply on refund – refund was rightly sanctioned by Commissioner (Appeals)

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 256
  

  Penalty levied u/s 271 (1)(c) - assessment order indicates no satisfaction by the Assessing Officer that the penalty proceedings should be initiated against the Assessee – moreover, revenue had been unable to demonstrate that the Assessee had concealed any income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income – therefore, no penalty can be levied - No substantial question of law arises in these revenue’s appeals - these appeals are dismissed

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 255
  

  Penalty levied u/s 271 (1)(c) - assessment order indicates no satisfaction by the Assessing Officer that the penalty proceedings should be initiated against the Assessee – moreover, revenue had been unable to demonstrate that the Assessee had concealed any income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income – therefore, no penalty can be levied – penalty proceedings not sustainable

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 254
  

  Whether revenue can make additions on basis of material collected during illegal search - The inventory of stock was prepared by the Inspector during the course of illegal survey and material was then used by the Assessing Officer for making, additions - Revenue was entitled to use the material collected during the course of illegal survey - Held that even in the case of illegal survey, material collected can be used for additions

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 253
  

  Availability of Cenvat credit on CHA & C/F services availed for export - appellant submition that in respect of exports the place of removal should be treated as port from which the goods are shipped and the factory gate, is not acceptable - CHA services availed in respect of export does not have any nexus with the manufacture and clearance of the product from the factory - services rendered at the port area are not covered as input service – credit not allowable

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 252
  

  Credit denied on ground that invoices were raised in contractors’ name - disputed bills have come in the names of the contractors but most of these bills indicated that the goods were on account of the appellant - some of the bills indicated that the supplies were meant for the contractors with care of address of the appellant factory - not disputed that the goods have been received and utilized in the appellant factory – therefore, credit is not deniable

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 251
  

  Tribunal hold that the case of the assessee was covered u/s 80HHC(3)(a) and not u/s 80HHC(3) (b) and hence special deduction is allowable to assessee – held that assessee business actively of assessee does not consist exclusively of exports outside India of the goods or merchandise and had mixture of export as well as domestic activities and therefore he would be entitled to have deduction as per section 80HHC(3)(b) on a pro rata basis not u/s 80HHC(3)(a)

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 250
  

  Penalty was set aside by the Tribunal on the ground that the AO had not recorded any satisfaction in the assessment order that there was either concealment or inaccurate particulars furnished by the Assessee – no satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that penalty proceedings are required to be initiated against the Assessee is discernible - requirement of Section 271(1)(c) as explained by this Court in Ram Commercial Enterprises Ltd. not satisfied – penalty was rightly set aside by ITAT

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 249
  

  Refund - bar of unjust enrichment – Revenue’s contention that after the issuance of the C.A.’s certificate, the appellant might have recovered the said amount from their customers, is not acceptable - Admittedly, the service tax amount was shown separately in the invoices - As the tax was not paid at the time of payment of services value, the Revenue’s contention is in the realm of assumptions and presumption – impugned order of commissioner is upheld – appeal rejected

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 248
  

  Appellant are engaged in the business of hiring and renting of vehicles - appellants have failed to obtain Service Tax Registration, failed to pay service tax and non-furnishing of required information – held that service tax was payable even if a person was engaged in the business of engaging taxis for customers and giving them service even without owning or plying the vehicle, under the category of running ‘rent-a-cab scheme of operators’ – larger period invocable – penalty justified

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 247
  

  Recovery of wrongly availed cenvat credit – invoices – It is not in dispute that the credit has been taken on the basis of invoices issued by dealer M/s.N.K. Rayon and M/s. Massom Creation - They did not exist in the address given by them. The registration certificates given to them were provisional - documents cannot be held to be valid for the purpose of taking credit – demand of duty and interest is upheld – penalty is set aside

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 246
  

  Valuation - 50 ml bottles meant for free distribution to farmers along with seeds –MRP price not declared on the bottles of 50 ml. - unless there is an element of sale, as contemplated in section 2(v), Rule 6(1)(f) will not be attracted and thus such package would not be governed under the provisions of SWM (PC) Rules which would clearly take such package out of the restricted arena of section 4A(1) and would put it in the broader arena of section 4

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 245
  

  Processed embroidered fabrics - Notification No. 63/94-C.E. - nil rate of duty - neither SCN nor the OIO seek to classify the processed goods under heading 58.05, on the other hand the Assistant Commissioner has approved the processed embroidered fabrics under chapter 5805.13 chargeable to nil rate of duty which classification has not been challenged by the Revenue before the Commissioner (Appeals) – hence goods are classifiable u/h 5805.13

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 244
  

  Articles conditionally and presentation of the articles neither bear the name of the company nor its logo and hence, it cannot be treated as meant for advertisement - It was given under a definite scheme for promotion of sales and the items were to be presented by the assessee only on attaining some specific targets - rule 6B would not be attracted and hence, it would come within the trade promotion and not advertisement – deduction allowed

  ---

• 2007 (9) TMI 243
  

  Application for the condonation of delay - appellant claims that they have given the papers for filing appeal with the learned consultant before expiry of 3 months time of filing the appeal; the consultant was suffering from hypertension; the file was mis-placed and therefore, there is a delay of nearly 9 months - revenue submits that the consultant has been attending to the Tribunal during this period of 9 months and therefore, the reason of delay is not justified – application rejected

  ---

1 ....171819202122232425........ 33