SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE)
|
|
- Georgina Booker
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE) 2015-TIOL-284-SC-CX CCE Vs M/s Virat Crane Industries Ltd (Dated: November 6, 2015) Central Excise - Branded Chewing Tobacco - Not relevant whether the brand is own or not: exemption to unbranded chewing tobacco - The definition, as stipulated, does not limit the brand name to third party brand name. Therefore, the irresistible conclusion would be that once the goods are sold under any brand name, whether that belongs to the assessee or the third party the goods would be treated as branded name TIOL-283-SC-CX M/s Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills Vs CCE (Dated: November 24, 2015) Central Excise - Section 3A - Omission" being tantamount to a "deletion" is a form of repeal: On a conjoint reading of the three expressions "delete", "omit", and "repeal", it becomes clear that "delete" and "omit" are used interchangeably, so that when the expression "repeal" refers to "delete" it would necessarily take within its ken an omission as well. This being the case, we do not find any substance in the argument that a "repeal" amounts to an obliteration from the very beginning, whereas an "omission" is only in futuro. Interest and Penalty provisions of Rules 96 ZO, ZP,ZQ quashed: it will have to be declared that since Section 3A which provides for a separate scheme for availing facilities under a compound levy scheme does not itself provide for the levying of interest, Rules 96 ZO, 96 ZP and 96 ZQ cannot do so and therefore on this ground the appellant has to succeed. A penalty can only be levie d by authority of statutory law, and Section 37 of the Act, does not expressly authorize the Government to levy penalty higher than Rs.5,000/. This further shows that imposition of a mandatory penalty equal to the amount of duty not being by statute would itself make rules 96ZO, 96 ZP and 96 ZQ without authority of law TIOL-282-SC-CX CCE Vs M/s Nestle India Ltd (Dated: November 24, 2015) Central Excise - EOU - goods manufactured wholly out of indigenous raw materials Valuation - Central Excise Valuation and not Customs FOB applicable: There is no doubt whatsoever that the duty of excise leviable under Section 3 would be on the basis of the value of like goods produced or manufactured outside India as determinable in accordance with the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and the Customs Tariff act, However, the notification states that duty calculated on the said basis would only be payable to the extent of like goods manufactured in India by persons other than 100% EOUs. This being the case, it is clear that in the absence of actual sales in the wholesale market, when goods are captively consumed and not sold, Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules would have to be followed to determine what would be the amount equal to the duty of excise leviable on like goods. Sold or allowed to be sold? The test to be applied under the said notification is
2 whether the goods in question are "allowed to be sold" in India. The aforesaid expression is obviously different from the expression "sold" and does not require any actual sale for the notification to be attracted. In fact, revenue's case is also that even though the said notification is attracted, yet because there is no sale somehow the FOB export price of like goods alone is to be looked at. If this were to be so, not only would the object of the notification not be sub-served but even its plain language would be violated. It is clear that the said notification has been framed by the Central Government, in its wisdom, to levy only what is levied by way of excise duty on similar goods manufactured in India, on goods produced and sold by 100% EOUs in the domestic tariff area if they are produced from indigenous raw materials TIOL-273-SC-CX CCE Vs M/s Brimco Plastic Machinery Pvt Ltd (Dated: September 29, 2015) Central Excise - Valuation - whether the installation, erection and commissioning charges for equipment installed at customer's premises and values thereof can be added/included for determining the assessable value? - CESTAT has relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in PSI Data System Ltd. v. Collector TIOL- 46-SC-CX, Mittal Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector TIOL-201-SC-CX, holding that inclusion of installation, erection and commissioning charges for equipment installed at customer's premises cannot be added/ included to determine the assessable value. - para 4 This is obvious conclusion on reading of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act as per which the transaction value is to be arrived at at the time of clearance of the goods at the factory gate. All the expenses which are incurred post clearance (that too, after the supply of equipment) in respect of installation, etc., could not have been taken into consideration in the facts of the present case as noted by the CESTAT. - para TIOL-272-SC-CX M/s Madras Cements Ltd Vs CCE (Dated: October 7, 2015) Central Excise Modvat /CENVAT credit of inputs used in mines entitled - the goods in question were captively used for the construction of the plant and had nothing to do with the mining which is accepted by the Department itself in the show cause notice. Yet the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner (A). There was no need to remand the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) as on admitted facts when the principle laid down in Vikram Cement's case is applied, the assessee was not liable to pay any duty. The order of the CESTAT remitting the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) is thus, set aside allowing these appeals TIOL-268-SC-CX CCE Vs M/s Godrej Hershey Ltd (Dated: September 17, 2015) CX - Classification of Apple Tree Top, Mango Tree Top, Guava Tree Top and Orange Tree Top - Appellant classifying the same in Tariff Heading of the CETA, on the ground that it was a preparation of fruit whereas Revenue classifying the same under heading which covers, inter-alia, other non-alcoholic beverages not including fruit and vegetable juices - In appeal filed by manufacturer, Supreme Court had by order dated set aside the order passed by Tribunal and remanded the matter - in remand, Tribunal arriving at the conclusion that the products in question manufactured by the appellant are "fruit preparation" within the meaning of Tariff
3 Heading Revenue in appeal before Supreme Court. Held: Nothing shown by Counsel for the Revenue to arrive at the conclusion that what has been stated by Tribunal is erroneous - Apple Tree Top, Mango Tree Top, Guava Tree Top and Orange Tree Top is correctly classifiable under heading as "fruit preparation" - reasoning of Tribunal approved and Revenue appeal dismissed: Supreme Court [para 3, 5] 2015-TIOL-264-SC-CX Bajaj Auto Ltd Vs CCE & C (Dated: July 29, 2015) Central Excise: Manufacture No manufacturing process involved in by-products : during the manufacture of die-casting of aluminium parts, dross and ash emerge as by-products and, therefore, insofar as these by-products are concerned, no manufacturing process is involved and on that basis, it has held that no excise duty shall be payable thereupon TIOL-262-SC-CX M/s Meridian Industries Ltd Vs CCE (Dated: October 27, 2015) Central Excise - EOU - Concessional rate to goods cleared to DTA, when manufactured from indigenous raw material. Exemption Notification - Strict Interpretation: Since it is an exemption notification, onus lies upon the appellant to show that its case fa lls within the four corners of this notification and is unambiguously covered by the provisions thereof. It is also to be borne in mind that such exemption notifications are to be given strict interpretation and, therefore, unless the assessee is able to make out a clear case in its favour, it is not entitled to claim the benefit thereof. Otherwise, if there is a doubt or two interpretations are possible, one which favours the Department is to be resorted to while construing an exemption notification. - para 13 Imported wax used in manufacture of cotton yarn - not eligible for exemption: The gravamen of the charge against the appellant is that wax disc which is admittedly imported and used for the production of cotton yarn constitutes 'raw material' and since imported material is used for the production of the aforesaid commodity, benefit of Notification No.8 /97- C.E. cannot be extended to the appellant. It is not in dispute that wax is used in the process which is an imported material. However, the refuta tion of the appellant is that wax is not 'raw material' and it is only used as 'consumable' in the process of manufacturing cotton yarn. - para 14 A particular item, though required for a manufacturing process or participates in the said process would be treated as 'consumable', if it does not form part of end product and instead it gets substantially or totally consumed during the manufacturing process. In contrast, if any materials or goods are required for the manufacturing process, such materials or goods would be treated as the 'raw material', whether they have actually been previously manufactured or are processed or are still in a raw or natural state. - para 15 Evidence has emerged on record, on which there is no dispute, that the final product which was cleared by the assessee, namely, cotton yarn was made of indigenous as well as imported cotton coated with imported wax. The wax coating is found to be essential for lubrication of the yarn and was allowed to remain on the yarn in order to facilitate its winding on cones and its use in knitting hosiery. - para 21
4 2015-TIOL-261-SC-CX CCE Vs M/s Nebulae Health Care Ltd (Dated: October 27, 2015) Central Excise - SSI Exemption - Exemption for own goods and duty payment with CENVAT Credit for branded goods - Permissible: It is not in dispute that the respondents - assessees fulfill eligibility conditions for availing the benefit of SSI exemption under the Notifications. However, in addition to manufacturing goods on their own account, they are also doing job work of manufacturing goods of certain other parties on job work basis. The goods manufactured for third parties bear the brand name of those third parties and in respect of such goods manufactured for third parties, the assessees paid the normal duty of excise but at the same time availed the benefit of MODVAT /CENVAT credit as well. - para 2 So far as manufacture of branded goods of third party on job work basis by the SSI Unit is concerned, they are to be dealt with differently in the sense that they do not come within the ambit of exemption on which normally excise duty, as per the provisions of the Act, is payable. As a sequitur, it also follows that once excise duty is paid by the manufacturer on such branded goods manufactured, the brand name whereof belongs to another person, on job work basis, the SSI Unit would be entitled to CENVAT/ MODVAT credit on the inputs which were used for manufacture of such goods as on those inputs also excise duty was paid. To put it otherwise, these branded goods manufactured by the SSI Units meant for third parties are regulated by the normal provisions of excise law and will have no bearing or relevance insofar as availing the benefit of those exemption notifications in respect of its own products manufactured by the SSI Units is concerned. - para 17 Admittedly, in respect of home production, the assessee had not availed the benefit of two options simultaneously as no CENVAT credit is claimed in respect of those goods. - para TIOL-260-SC-CX CCE & ST Vs M/s Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd Etc (Dated: October 28, 2015) Central Excise - Exemption Notification No. 38/2003-CE dated Subject to process subsequent to purchase - A bare reading of the aforesaid Notification makes it clear that the benefit thereof is given to those assessees when, at their hands, article of apparel or clothing accessories is subjected to any one or more of the processes, which are mentioned herein. However, any of such process as mentioned herein is to be carried out by the assessee "subsequent to purchase" of the article of apparel or clothing accessories in question. The only question is as to whether such process was undertaken by these assessees after the purchase of material. The submission of the Department in this behalf is that since it is the assessees who had assigned the work, that is fabrication of the apparel etc. to the job workers with the supply of material as well, and the job workers after undertaking the job had supplied the said material back to the assessees, this does not amount to purchase. As per the Supreme Court judgement in Ujagar Prints, etc. etc. vs. Union of India & Ors TIOL-03-SC-CX-CB, for the purpose of arriving at the value of the job at the hands of job workers, factory gate is treated as "deemed" factory gate as if the processed fabric was sold by the assessee. It cannot be disputed that the fact situation in these cases is identical where the job workers had paid the excise duty at the time of supply of these processed fabric to the respondent assessees. Once that
5 could be treated as sale, the necessary corollary is that so far as the assessees are concerned, they had purchased processed fabric from the job workers and, therefore, would satisfy the condition of "subsequent purchase" contained in Notification No. 38/2003. The benefit of exemption notification is rightly extended by the Tribunal to the respondents-assessees. No merit in Revenue Appeal.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2016 VERSUS J U D G M E N T
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11261 OF 2016 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ULTRA TECH CEMENT LTD....RESPONDENT(S)
More informationCredit allowed on capital goods use to manufacture exempted intermediate product as duty was paid on final product
Credit allowed on capital goods use to manufacture exempted intermediate product as duty was paid on final product Cenvat Credit : Cenvat credit cannot be denied on capital goods used in manufacture of
More information[2016] CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH
[2016] 67 taxmann.com 251 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH Nirlon Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai* M.V. RAVINDRAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND C.J. MATHEW, TECHNICAL MEMBER ORDER NOS. A/85680-85681/2016/STB
More informationParle Agro Pvt. Ltd. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Trivandrum
[2016] 92 VST 291 (Ker) [IN THE KERALA HIGH COURT] HF Department. Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Trivandrum THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN AND MRS. ANU SIVARAMAN JJ. February 05,2016
More informationINDIRECT TAXES Central Excise and Customs Case Law Update
CA. Hasmukh Kamdar INDIRECT TAXES Central Excise and Customs Case Law Update Valuation Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai vs. Fiat India Pvt. Ltd. [2012 (283) ELT 161 (S.C.) decided on 29-8-12] Facts
More informationSUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE)
SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE) 2015-TIOL-256-SC-CX CCE Vs Amrit Food (Dated: September 3, 2015) Central Excise - Classification - milk shake mix and soft serve mix: The Customs, Excise and Service
More informationRespondent preferred an appeal there against before the Commissioner (Appeals), which by an order dated was allowed. Appellant preferred an
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appeal No. 5901 of 2006 Decided On: 03.03.2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida Vs. Accurate Meters Ltd. Hon'ble Judges: S.B. Sinha, Asok Kumar Ganguly and R.M.
More informationGST. Valuation and Job Work under GST
372 Valuation and Job Work under With the passage of the Constitution (122 nd Amendment) Bill, 2014, (popularly known as Bill) in Parliament, a uniform indirect tax regime across India is one step closer
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: CEAR No. 5/2001 UOI & ORS...
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 Judgment reserved on: 05.07.2011 Judgment delivered on: 12.07.2011 CEAR No. 5/2001 M/s PURE DRINKS LTD.... APPELLANT Vs UOI
More information2011 NTN 46)-10 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]
2011 NTN (Vol. 46)-10 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, & Anil R. Dave, JJ. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3186 OF 2011 [Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 560 of 2011] Commissioner
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.683 OF 2006
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.683 OF 2006 1) The Commissioner of Central Excise, Central Excise Building, Telangkhedi Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur. 2)
More informationWhat is Manufacture under Excise?
What is Manufacture under Excise? Manufacture - Sec. 2(f) Process - Incidental/ ancilliary for the completion of main product Land Mark Case - UOI V. DCM Any process amounting to manufacture as specified
More information1
www.icwahelpn.co.in 1 ICWAI Objective Type questions and Answers on Indirect Tax 1. Multiple Choice Questions (1) Excise duty can be levied on those goods which are (a) Manufactured in India (b) Sold in
More informationFINAL November INDIRECT TAXATION Test Code 67 Branch (MULTIPLE) (Date : ) All questions are compulsory.
FINAL November 2017 INDIRECT TAXATION Test Code 67 Branch (MULTIPLE) (Date : 10.09.2017) (50 Marks) Note: All questions are compulsory. Answer 1(6 Marks) Status Holders are business leaders who have excelled
More informationSARLA PERFORMANCE FIBERS LTD. ETC. Vs. C.C.E., SURAT-II. Dated - June 03, 2016
SARLA PERFORMANCE FIBERS LTD. ETC. Vs. C.C.E., SURAT-II. Dated - June 03, 2016 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3555-3560 OF 2012 Sarla Performance
More informationChapter 1 - Basic Concepts
Chapter 1 - Basic Concepts 1.1 Introduction Prior to 1944 there were 16 individual Acts which levied excise duty. Each such act dealt with one or same type of commodities. All these acts were consolidated
More information2011-TIOL-443-HC-MAD-CUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS. C.M.A.No.3727 of 2004, W.P of 2011 and W.P of 1998 and CMP.No.
2011-TIOL-443-HC-MAD-CUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS C.M.A.No.3727 of 2004, W.P.21054 of 2011 and W.P.12403 of 1998 and CMP.No.20013 of 2004 VETCARE ORGANIC PVT LTD Vs CESTAT, CHENNAI COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,
More informationJUNE 18INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT PATRON ADVISER ADVISER
JUNE 18INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT PATRON SH.V.K.AGARWAL Formerly Member-Customs, Excise &ServiceTax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi Mobile No. 9818903406 E-mail:agrawalnagrawal@yahoo.co.in SH. L.P.ASTHANA Formerly
More informationCIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. ()
(2010) 322 ITR 0158 :(2010) 032 (I) ITCL 0600 :(2010) 230 CTR 0320 :(2010) 036 DTR 0449 CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. () INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 --Penalty under section 271(1)(c)--Inaccurate particulars
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO BETWEEN : AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR CRP No.332/2010 STATE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INCOME TAX MATTER. Judgment delivered on : ITR Nos. 159 to 161 /1988
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INCOME TAX MATTER Judgment delivered on : 09.07.2008 ITR Nos. 159 to 161 /1988 M/S DELHI INTER EXPORTS PVT LTD... Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
More informationLegal Update INDIRECT TAXES
1774 Legal Update entitled to a specified percentage of the distributor s sales revenue less operating costs/expenses of the distributor. However, ITAT noted that since the assessee had no revenue left
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATER. Judgment delivered on: ITA 243/2008. versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATER Judgment delivered on: 26.11.2008 ITA 243/2008 SUBODH KUMAR BHARGAVA... Appellant versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX... Respondent Advocates
More informationthe income was received from letting out of the properties, it was in the nature of rental income. He, thus, held that it would be treated as income f
'REPORTABLE' IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4494 OF 2004 M/S CHENNAI PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS LTD., CHENNAI... Appellant VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
More informationwith ITA No.66/2011 % Decision Delivered On: JANUARY 20, VERSUS ORIENT CERAMICS & INDS. LTD. VERSUS
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.65 of 2011 with ITA No.66/2011 % Decision Delivered On: JANUARY 20, 2011. 1) ITA No.65 of 2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX... Appellant through : Mr. Anupam
More informationAdvanced Tax Laws and Practice
Advanced Tax Laws and Practice Roll No : 1 : 376 Time allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100 Total number of questions : 8 Total number of printed pages : 8 NOTE : All the references to sections mentioned
More information2015-TIOL-1036-CESTAT-MUM IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI COURT NO.I
2015-TIOL-1036-CESTAT-MUM IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI COURT NO.I Appeal No.ST/85482/14 & ST/86082/14 Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. PUN-EXCUS-003-APP-316-13-14
More informationCommissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Mumbai. Neulife Nutrition System; Neulife Nutrition System
[2016] 93 VST 132 (Bom) [IN THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT] Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Mumbai V. Neulife Nutrition System; Neulife Nutrition System DHARMADHIKARI S. C. AND SAYED A. A. JJ. May
More informationTHANTHI TRUST V. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX
THANTHI TRUST V. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX In the Madras High Court R. Jayasimha Babu, J. W.P. Nos. 6193 of 1995 & 266-267 of 1998 15 October 1998 A. Y. 1992-93, 1995-96 & 1996-97 Income Tax Act,
More informationTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate VERSUS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT ITA NO.1192/2011 Reserved on : 8th November, 2011. Date of Decision : 21st November, 2011. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV... Appellant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CUSTOMS ACT, 1962 RESERVED ON: PRONOUNCED ON: CUSAA 3/2014 & C.M. No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CUSTOMS ACT, 1962 RESERVED ON: 11.03.2014 PRONOUNCED ON: 16.04.2014 CUSAA 3/2014 & C.M. No.829/2014 SONY INDIA PVT. LTD..APPELLANT Through : Mr. Tarun
More informationCommissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Punjab Chemical & Crop Protection Ltd
Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Punjab Chemical & Crop Protection Ltd Judgement: 1. Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. - This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in
More informationCAPTIVATING CAPTIVE CONSUMPTION
CAPTIVATING CAPTIVE CONSUMPTION (S. Jaikumar, G. Natarajan & M. Karthikeyan) We have received an interesting poser, which is the feedstock of this article. The query goes, as to whether the pallets, racks,
More informationCERTIFICATE COURSE ON INDIRECT TAXES
THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA Indirect Taxes Committee CERTIFICATE COURSE ON INDIRECT TAXES SUGGESTED ANSWERS OF THE ASSESSMENT TEST HELD ON 25 TH AUGUST, 2012 PART A Write the correct
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA. ITA No.450/Ag/2015 Assessment Year:
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.450/Ag/2015 Assessment Year:2009-2010 ITO (TDS),
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR BETWEEN: STA No.36/2010 3M INDIA
More informationPKMG LAW CHAMBERS ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS LAW REPORT ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS. ADVISER ADVISER
PKMG LAW CHAMBERS LAW CHAMBERS ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS LAW REPORT ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS www.pkmgcorporatelaws.com ADVISER ADVISER Mr. Pradeep K. Mittal B.Com., LL.B., FCS, Mr. PRADEEP Advocate K. MITTAL
More informationCENVAT CREDIT Recent Court Rulings Presented by: Ca. Jayesh Gogri
CENVAT CREDIT Recent Court Rulings Presented by: Ca. Jayesh Gogri 7/2/13 CA JAYESH Organised GOGRI by: 1 Wrong availment of CENVAT Credit and interest thereon Mr. Inamdaar was engaged in the manufacture
More informationJOB WORK UNDER CENTRAL EXCISE
JOB WORK UNDER CENTRAL EXCISE By Madhukar N Hiregange (FCA, DISA) & Prateek M (B.Com, ACA) Job work is one of the important aspects that a manufacturer registered under Central Excise should be familiar
More informationThe manufacturer or the service provider may procure the inputs or capital goods with the intention of using the same
Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 Removal As Such CENVAT CREDIT RULES 2004 REMOVAL AS SUCH - By CA Madhukar N Hiregange The CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 enable a manufacturer under central excise to avail the credit
More informationApplicability of CST/ VAT on E-Commerce Transactions:
Applicability of CST/ VAT on E-Commerce Transactions: The business model of e-com firms is they provide a platform for enabling sellers of goods to be able to sell without boundaries of location across
More information2011 NTN (Vol. 45)-75 [PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] Hon'ble Adarsh Kumar Goel. Hon'ble Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. VAT Appeal No. 54 of 2010 (O&M) M/s
2011 NTN (Vol. 45)-75 [PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] Hon'ble Adarsh Kumar Goel. Hon'ble Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. VAT Appeal No. 54 of 2010 (O&M) M/s Nokia India Pvt. Ltd., Appellant. vs. State of Punjab
More informationClick to Close. Click to Print. Case Tracker. Passed by the. Date COMMISSIONER MUMBAI-II. Airline
Click to Print Click to Close 2017-TIOL-3894-CESTAT-MUM IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI Case Tracker DHL LOGISTICS PVT LTD Vs CCE [CESTAT] Appeal No.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Tax Appeal No. 7 of 2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Tax Appeal No. 7 of 2005 Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamshedpur Versus Appellant M/s. Hitech Chemical (P) Ltd., Jamshedpur Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF
More informationUnion Budget CA. Ashok Batra. (The author is a member of the Institute. He can be reached at )
1449 Changes in the Finance Act, 1994 And Rules [Except Mega Exemption Notification, Negative List Changes And Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 Changes] One of the striking features of the Finance Bill, 2015
More informationF. No. 137/85/2007-CX. 4 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs New Delhi
Cirlcular No. 97/8/2007 F. No. 137/85/2007-CX. 4 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs New Delhi Procedural issues in Service Tax-circular-reg.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BETWEEN: DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF APRIL 2013 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR TAET NO.7/2011 AND TAET NOs.8-9/2011
More informationTime allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100. Total number of questions : 8 Total number of printed pages : 7
: 1 : Roll No... Time allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100 Total number of questions : 8 Total number of printed pages : 7 NOTE : All references to sections mentioned in Part-A of the Question Paper relate
More informationINDIRECT TAX UPDATES RSA Legal Solutions 11 th August 2017
INDIRECT TAX UPDATES RSA Legal Solutions 11 th August 2017 About RSA Legal Solutions RSA Legal Solutions is an Indian Law firm specialized in the area of Indirect taxation i.e. Goods and Services Tax,
More informationStaying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter
Staying Updated, FTP and WTO newsletter December 2013: Volume 16 Issue 9 News The Central Government is in the process of designing a mechanism for importers to easily pass on cenvat credit of CVD to a
More information: 1 : Time allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100. Total number of questions : 6 Total number of printed pages : 8
Roll No : 1 : NEW SYLLABUS 337 Time allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100 Total number of questions : 6 Total number of printed pages : 8 NOTE : 1. Answer ALL Questions. 2. All the references to sections
More informationOIO No. 08/JC/2011 Dated : BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE: M/s Bhavin Impex Pvt. Ltd., Plot 129, GIDC, Phase - II, Dared, Dist: Jamnagar (100% EOU) (hereinafter referred to as the noticee ) are engaged in the manufacturing of brass sanitary
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. ITA No-160/2005. Judgment reserved on: 12th March, 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER ITA No-160/2005 Judgment reserved on: 12th March, 2007 Judgment delivered on: 24th May, 2007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-I, NEW DELHI...
More informationCS Professional Programme Solution June Paper - 6 Module-III Advanced Tax Laws and Practice Part-A
CS Professional Programme Solution June - 2013 Paper - 6 Module-III Advanced Tax Laws and Practice Part-A Answer: 2013 - June [1] (a) (i) Ch-14 The statement is True. As per Section 115 BBD, dividend from
More informationCOMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX. MONSANTO MANUFACTURER PVT. LTD. and vice versa)
[2014] 71 VST 269 (All) [IN THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX V. MONSANTO MANUFACTURER PVT. LTD. and vice versa) DR. DHANANJAYA YESHWANT CHANDRACHUD C.J. March
More informationOCTOBER 18 INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT PATRON ADVISER ADVISER
OCTOBER 18 INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT PATRON SH.V.K.AGARWAL Formerly Member-Customs, Excise &ServiceTax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi Mobile No. 9818903406 E-mail:agrawalnagrawal@yahoo.co.in SH. L.P.ASTHANA
More informationDownloaded from :
Downloaded from : http://abcaus.in PETITIONER: BHARAT COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL II DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/03/1998 BENCH: SUJATA V.MANOHAR, D.P. WADHWA
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: versus
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 02.06.2010 + WP(C) 3899/2010 GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD... Petitioner versus UOI AND ORS... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case:- For
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : CORAM. THE Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY. W.P.No.1226 of 2016
1 RESERVED ON: 16.02.2016 DELIVERED ON: 19.02.2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 19.02.2016 CORAM THE Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY W.P.No.1226 of 2016 M/s Raghav Industries Ltd.,
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena A. Pillai, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena A. Pillai, JM : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Income Tax Officer, TDS Rohtak (APPELLANT) PAN No. RTKPO1586E
More information[2016] 68 taxmann.com 41 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH. Commissioner of Service Tax. Vs. Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd.
[2016] 68 taxmann.com 41 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH Commissioner of Service Tax Vs. Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd.* M.V. RAVINDRAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ORDER NO. A/85873/16/SMB AND OTHERS FEBRUARY
More information$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 448/2016, CM APPL.26426/2016 TRIUNE PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED... Appellant Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati with Mr. Rony O John, Mr. Shashi Mathews and Ms.
More informationINDIRECT TAXES CASE STUDY
INDIRECT TAXES CASE STUDY FOR CA FINAL NOV 2011 COMPILED BY CA. BIKASH BOGI MUMBAI (INDIA) bikashbogi.blogspot.com P a g e 1 Sl No. Statute Pg No. 1. SERVICE TAX : 3-10 2. CENTRAL EXCISE : 11-15 3. CUSTOMS
More informationINTERMEDIATE EXAMINATION GROUP - II (SYLLABUS 2016)
INTERMEDIATE EXAMINATION GROUP - II (SYLLABUS 2016) SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS DECEMBER - 2017 Paper-11 : INDIRECT TAXATION Time Allowed : 3 Hours Full Marks : 100 The figures in the margin on the
More informationCopyright -The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Attempt all questions PART A Question 1 (a) (i) Briefly explain with reference to the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 the provision
More informationVERENDRA KALRA & CO CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS INDIRECT TAX REVIEW JULY 2016 EXCISE CUSTOMS SERVICE TAX VALUE ADDED TAX. Inside this edition
VERENDRA KALRA & CO CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS EXCISE Like always, Like never before CUSTOMS INDIRECT TAX REVIEW JULY 2016 Inside this edition SERVICE TAX VALUE ADDED TAX Changes in Excise Duty on Articles
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT Date of decision: 9th July, 2013 ITA 131/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT Date of decision: 9th July, 2013 ITA 131/2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX... Appellant Through Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, sr. standing counsel.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12 th DAY OF JUNE 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR STRP 120/2013 & STRPs.229-250/2013 c/w STRP
More information[2014] CESTAT) CESTAT, NEW DELHI BENCH
Service Tax : Contention that 'assessee was not service-provider but was service-recipient' is not 'a piece of evidence', it is a 'pleading, a ground of appeal' and goes to root of jurisdiction; hence,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. Dated this the 17 th day of June 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 17 th day of June 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MANOHAR ITA No. 578 of 2008 BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner
More informationSummary of Notifications, Circulars from 16 th June, 2016 to 15 th July, 2016
Summary of Notifications, Circulars from 16 th June, 2016 to 15 th July, 2016 SERVICE TAX 1. Services Provided prior to 31st May 2016 exempt from Krishi Kalyan Cess (KKC) The Central Government vide Notification
More informationPKMG LAW CHAMBERS. ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT ADVISER. Mr. Pradeep K. Mittal. B.Com., LL.B.
PKMG LAW CHAMBERS LAW CHAMBERS ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT www.pkmgcorporatelaws.com ADVISER Mr. Pradeep K. Mittal B.Com., LL.B., FCS, Advocate Central Council Member The Institute
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 CEAC 2/2012 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 01, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 CEAC 2/2012 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 01, 2012 SRI SAI ENTERPRISES & ANR. Through Mr. R. Krishnan, Advocate.... Petitioners
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI R-67. versus M/S ERICSSON COMMUNICATIONS LTD.
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI R-67 + ITA 106/2002 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX... Appellant versus M/S ERICSSON COMMUNICATIONS LTD.... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. Income Tax Appeal No. 1167/2011. Reserved on: 21st October, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER Income Tax Appeal No. 1167/2011 Reserved on: 21st October, 2011 Date of Decision: 8th November, 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-IV,
More information2009 NTN (Vol. 41) - 89 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Hon'ble Mr. S.H. Kapadia & Hon'ble Mr. Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ. Civil Appeal No.
2009 NTN (Vol. 41) - 89 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Hon'ble Mr. S.H. Kapadia & Hon'ble Mr. Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 2765 of 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.1471/2008) M/s. Varkisons
More informationStaying Updated Indirect tax newsletter
Staying Updated Indirect tax newsletter September 2015, Volume 18 Issue 06 In the issue In the issue Manufacture Aluminium dross and ash emerging as by-products during the diecasting of aluminium parts
More information2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-11(1) RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE APPELLANTS (BY SRI K V ARAVIND, ADV.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF MARCH 2015 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN BETWEEN AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA ITA NO.297/2014 1. THE COMMISSIONER
More informationCA SHARAD A SHAH. 21/06/2014 DTRC - Pune WIRC
CA SHARAD A SHAH 21/06/2014 DTRC - Pune WIRC-2014 1 Relevant Part of Section 271 (1) If the Assessing Officer] or the [Commissioner (Appeals)][or the Commissioner] in the course of any proceedings under
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
ITRs 4TO6/02,7/95&18/98 1 Common Judgment IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 4/2002 WITH INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 5/2002 WITH INCOME TAX REFERENCE
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No. 328/2008 Reserved on : July 23, 2009 Date of decision : July 24, 2009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX... Appellant. Through: Ms. P.L. Bansal with Ms. Anshul
More informationTime allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100. Total number of questions : 8 Total number of printed pages : 6
: 1 : Roll No... Time allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100 Total number of questions : 8 Total number of printed pages : 6 NOTE : All references to sections mentioned in Part-A of the Question Paper relate
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BETWEEN : DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR STA No.112/2009 M/S
More information2015 (1) TMI CESTAT NEW DELHI
2015 (1) TMI 1093 - CESTAT NEW DELHI Other Citation: 2014 (36) S.T.R. 815 (Tri. - Del.) MOSER BAER INDIA LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NOIDA Denial of CENVAT Credit - Transfer of credit -
More informationNandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Ltd. C. C. E., Lucknow Bajpur Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd. C. C. E., Meerut II
[2015] 79 VST 330 (CESTAT) [CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL] (NEW DELHI BENCH) Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Ltd. V. C. C. E., Lucknow Bajpur Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd. V. C. C. E.,
More informationIncome from business as computed in the assessment order
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, CJ. AND V.D. TULZAPURKAR, J. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 785 AND 783 OF 1977 APRIL 11, 1978 S.T.
More informationIn the High Court of Judicature at Madras. Date : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K.
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Date : 14.07.2015 The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K. Vasuki T.C.A. No: 398 of 2007 M/s. Anusha Investments Ltd. 8 Haddows Road
More informationINDIRECT TAXES CASE STUDY
INDIRECT TAXES CASE STUDY FOR CA FINAL MAY 2012 COMPILED BY CA. BIKASH BOGI MUMBAI (INDIA) P a g e 1 Sl No. Statute Pg No. 1. SERVICE TAX : 3-9 2. CENTRAL EXCISE : 10-12 3. CUSTOMS : 13-14 Source / Journals
More informationHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT Commissioner of Income-tax-I v. Aditya Medisales Ltd. M.R. SHAH AND MS. SONIA GOKANI, JJ. TAX APPEAL NO. 730 OF 2013 SEPTEMBER 2, 2013 JUDGMENT Ms. Sonia Gokani, J. - The Tax Appeal
More informationRule 8 (3A) of CE Rules, 2002 Is it all pervasive? (G. Natarajan, Advocate, Swamy associates)
Rule 8 (3A) of CE Rules, 2002 Is it all pervasive? (G. Natarajan, Advocate, Swamy associates) The decision of the Hon ble Tribunal in the case of Godrej Harshey Vs CCE (Citation) is sure to send shockwaves
More informationCORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 747 of 2013 ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V...Appellant(s) Versus POLESTAR INDUSTRIES...Opponent(s)
More informationEMS Technologies Pvt Ltd Vs CC & CE (Dated: September 28, 2016)
CESTAT RULING 2016-TIOL-2686-CESTAT-MUM Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd Vs CC (Dated: March 15, 2016) Cus - Appellant imported "Datacolour Autolab 32, Laboratory Dispenser and Solution Maker" and claimed classification
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE B. MANOHAR
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 18 th DAY OF JUNE 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE B. MANOHAR STRP NO.18/2010 & STRP.NOS.106-125/2010
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : THE DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1957 Date of decision: 31st July, 2012 LPA. No.48/2006.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : THE DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1957 Date of decision: 31st July, 2012 LPA. No.48/2006 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR JAIN...Appellant LPA. No.97-98/2006 M/S JAYANITA
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2015 COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA VERSUS
1 CORRECTED REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.13578 OF 2015 COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THOMAS COOK (INDIA) LTD. & ANR....RESPONDENT(S)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT, Date of Decision : 28th February, ITA 92/2011.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 Date of Decision : 28th February, 2012. ITA 92/2011 CIT Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, sr. standing counsel... Appellant versus MACHINO
More informationENTRY TAX ACT
Section Content Page No. Short title and commencement 2 2 Definitions 2 3 Incidence of taxation 4 4 Rate at which entry tax to be charged 7 5 Principles governing levy of entry tax on 32 [dealer or person]
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH. ITR No.192/1997 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR. M/s VINDHYA TELELINKS LTD JUDGEMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH ITR No.192/1997 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR Vs M/s VINDHYA TELELINKS LTD Krishn Kumar Lahoti and Smt Sushma Shrivastava JUDGEMENT Dated: February 22, 2011 The
More informationITA 256 OF In The High Court At Calcutta Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) Original Side
1 ITA 256 OF 2002 In The High Court At Calcutta Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) Original Side Present: The Hon ble Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta And The Hon ble Justice Kalidas Mukherjee Paharpur Cooling
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 637 of 2013 With TAX APPEAL NO. 1711 of 2009 With TAX APPEAL NO. 2577 of 2009 With TAX APPEAL NO. 925 of 2010 With TAX APPEAL NO. 949 of 2010 With
More information