Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  2. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  3. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  4. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  5. Text Search
  6. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  7. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  8. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • 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
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
2000
  • 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
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
8
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note

Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

NOTE:

Case Laws
Showing Results for : Law: AllYear: 2000 Volume: 8
Reset Filters
Results Found:
More details are visible to the Paid members. i.e:- Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote and Decision etc.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Court affirms transaction as loan, not deposit under section 269T.
The court dismissed the appeal by the Department, affirming that the transaction in question was a loan or accommodation and not a deposit as per section 269T. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had previously concluded that the entries constituted a form of loan, not a deposit, in line with legislative intent. The court upheld this decision, stating that the respondents did not breach section 269T by treating the transaction as a loan or accommodation.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Court Upholds Depositors' Rights: No Retroactive Amendments to Post Office Recurring Deposit Rules.
The HC dismissed the appeal, affirming that the amendment to Rule 9A of the Post Office Recurring Deposit Rules, 1981, was not retrospective. The Court held that depositors were entitled to the terms at the time of their deposit, granting them the right to premature closure under the unamended rules. The Court emphasized that Section 15 of the Government Savings Bank Act did not authorize retrospective rule-making, and fairness in contractual relationships required adherence to the original terms, rejecting unilateral amendments. Consequently, the petitioners were allowed to close their accounts prematurely with reduced interest as per the original agreement.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Court quashes sales tax registration cancellation, orders re-hearing. Petitioners granted relief, no costs.
The court quashed the first respondent's orders for canceling the petitioner's sales tax registration due to lack of a mandatory personal hearing. The first respondent was instructed to restart proceedings and issue new orders after granting the petitioners a chance to be heard. The writ petitions were granted, with no costs imposed, and all related petitions were closed.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Customs Tribunal Reduces Redemption Fine & Personal Penalty, Deems Original Amounts Excessive.
The Tribunal found the redemption fine and personal penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Customs excessive given the circumstances. They reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 15.00 lakhs to Rs. 5.00 lakhs and the personal penalty from Rs. 5.00 lakhs to Rs. 1.00 lakh. The appeal was rejected except for the modifications made to the fines.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
CEGAT Kolkata: Appellate Tribunal Allows Modvat Credit Appeal
The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Kolkata allowed the appeal, overturning the disallowance of Modvat credit and penalty imposed on the appellants. The Tribunal determined that the appellants were entitled to the credit since they received goods from S.A.I.L. and utilized them in their manufacturing process, even though invoicing was done through M/s. Indian Foundry Association.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Tribunal grants Modvat Credit for Inserts and cement, overturning denial.
The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing the Modvat Credit on both the Malleable Cast Iron Inserts and the cement. The appellants received the Inserts directly from the manufacturer and used them in manufacturing their final product, justifying the credit. Regarding the cement, the Tribunal found that the denial of credit was unjustified as the endorsement was done by L&T's own office. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting consequential reliefs to the appellants.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
CEGAT Appellate Tribunal Decision: Sandal Wood Oil Theft Case Remanded for Review
The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi ruled in a case involving theft of Sandal Wood Oil. The Commissioner (Appeals) overturned the Assistant Commissioner's decision to drop the duty demand due to improper remission of duty. The case was remanded for a detailed review as the Commissioner (Appeals) did not adequately consider the party's submissions.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)Headnote
Dispute over "Monalisa" brand ownership leads to duty demand confirmation and expert examination
The case centered on a dispute over the ownership of the brand-name "Monalisa," with allegations of tampering with statements and brand-name registration. The Commissioner's order confirmed duty demand, penalty, and interest, based on observations supporting the trading company's ownership claim. The judgment highlighted the need for expert examination of statements to determine actual ownership for small-scale exemption eligibility. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for further examination of evidence and brand-name registration status.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)Headnote
Appeal Allowed: Redemption Fine & Penalty Invalid Post Settlement.
The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi allowed the appeal, deeming the imposition of redemption fine and penalty after settlement under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme invalid. The deposited duty amount of Rs. 2,66,018/- was not challenged.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
CEGAT Kolkata: Rolls under Heading 8455.10 classified for countervailing duty. Impugned order overturned, appeal allowed.
The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Kolkata classified rolls under Heading 8455.10 for countervailing duty, overturning the impugned order and allowing the appeal.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)Headnote
Tribunal remands Tanjore paintings export case for fresh review, stresses need for expert examination
The Tribunal remanded the case concerning the export of Tanjore paintings seized under the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, for de novo consideration. The original orders were deemed insufficient as they lacked detailed reasoning and failed to address crucial evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for a fresh examination of the seized goods by experts, allowing the appellants the opportunity to participate in the process. The case highlighted the importance of proper analysis, cross-examination of experts, and adherence to principles of natural justice in determining the status of the paintings as antiques under the Act.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Appeal partly allowed: disallowance under sec 37(3A)-(3D) deleted, sec 80HHC upheld.
The appeal was partly allowed. The disallowance under sections 37(3A) to (3D) was deleted based on the precedent set by the ITAT, Rajkot Bench. However, the disallowance under section 80HHC was upheld as the assessee did not fulfill the necessary conditions for claiming the deduction, and the deduction had already been claimed by Batliboi Ltd.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Revenue's Appeal Partially Allowed for 1983-84 Assessment Year
The Tribunal partially allowed the Revenue's appeal for the assessment year 1983-84, upholding the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 and remanding the matter for further consideration. However, the appeals for the assessment years 1984-85 to 1986-87 and 1988-89 were dismissed, affirming the cancellation of reassessments for those years by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Tribunal Upholds Audit Extension, Approves Auditor Appointment, Sets Aside Assessment Order
The Tribunal held that the block assessment order completed on 29th April, 1998, was not time-barred as the audit report submission deadline was extended. The appointment of the auditor under section 142(2A) was deemed valid due to the complexity of the accounts. The approval from the CIT under section 158BG was upheld based on a Special Bench decision. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, setting aside the block assessment order due to procedural deficiencies, directing a fresh decision by the AO with proper opportunity for the assessee to be heard.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Tribunal rules in favor of assessee on interest payments & income source; procedural irregularities cited.
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals for the assessment year 1984-85 regarding the disallowance of interest paid to the Reserve Bank of India, holding that the payments were interest and not penalties. Additionally, the appeals for the assessment years 1985-86 to 1989-90 were also dismissed concerning the addition of Rs. 90,000 as income from other sources, as procedural irregularities in identifying depositors did not justify treating the deposits as the assessee's income.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Appeal on Interest Disallowance Rejected, Cross-objection Upheld: CIT(A) vs. Tribunal Decision (A)
The Revenue's appeal against the disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act was dismissed, as the CIT(A) ruled in favor of the assessee, finding no justification for the disallowance. On the other hand, the assessee's cross-objection challenging the disallowance of interest under section 40A(2) of the IT Act was allowed by the Tribunal, which deemed the interest rate of 12% reasonable based on trade norms, contrary to the AO's decision.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)Headnote
Appeals granted for cross-examination & fair hearing after unlawful order set aside.
The appeals were allowed by remand, granting the appellants the opportunity for cross-examination and a fair hearing before a fresh decision by the Jurisdictional Commissioner. The impugned order was deemed unlawful, set aside, and the case was remanded for a fresh decision, with directions to allow cross-examination and consider the appellants' submissions.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Tribunal rules galvanization of M.S. Pipes not manufacturing; no duty payment.
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, ruling that galvanisation of M.S. Pipes by M/s. Shakti Steel Pipes does not constitute manufacture, hence no duty payment is required. The Tribunal found no evidence of mala fide intent to evade duty, noting the separate registrations and independent operation of the entities. Despite the Revenue's arguments of unity between the two units, the Tribunal differentiated this case from past judgments and rejected the Revenue's appeals.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)Headnote
Tribunal Upholds Duty Demand on Cleaning Preparations, Remands Personal Penalty Assessment
The Tribunal confirmed the duty demand on products classified under sub-heading No. 3402.90, ruling that the products were cleaning preparations based on their characteristics and uses. It held that re-packing and re-labelling activities constituted manufacturing under chapter note 6 in chapter 34, as the products became fit for commercial use after processing. The Tribunal also found that the duty demand was not time-barred and upheld the duty imposition justification based on the distinct commercial nature of the products. The matter of personal penalty under section 11AC was remanded for further assessment based on duty quantum for relevant periods.
AI TextQuick Glance (AI)
Tribunal remands case for re-examination of Modvat credit admissibility, emphasizing compliance with amended rules
The Tribunal remanded the case to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for re-examining the admissibility of Modvat credit for the relevant period, emphasizing the importance of substantive compliance with Modvat requirements and considering the specific circumstances of the case. The decision was based on the amendment to Rules 57G and 57T, highlighting that certain grounds, including incomplete declaration details, should not result in denial of credit. The matter was referred back for further assessment in accordance with the amended provisions and Circulars, underscoring the significance of complying with Modvat regulations.

Case Laws

Back

All Case Laws

Showing Results for : Law: AllYear: 2000 Volume: 8
Reset Filters
Showing
Records
ExpandCollapse

    Case Laws

    Back

    All Case Laws

    Showing Results for : Law: AllYear: 2000 Volume: 8 Reset Filters
    More details are visible to the Paid members. i.e:- Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote and Decision etc.
    Case ID :

    📋
    Contents
    Note

    Note

    Note

    Bookmark

    print

    Print

    Login to TaxTMI
    Verification Pending

    The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

    Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

    Don't have an account? Register Here

    Topics

    ActsIncome Tax