|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Cabinet gives nod to set up Academy for Pilots + NIFT branch at Rae Bareli + Block Grant Scheme for funding of NIFT; President's Rule in Karnataka revoked; |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Dear Member, Also sending you the following files: |
||
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
CBDT transfers three ACITs; CBDT puts in abeyance transfer of many ACs till March 2008; CASE LAWS 2007-TIOL-382-ITAT-DEL.doc + TP story.doc Income Tax - Transfer Pricing - Assessee exclusively develops software for its parent company in the USA on order and the same is used alongwith others in the components used in the harware products sold in the open market - Also provides marketing systems services - Determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP) - Assessee does detailed due diligence to arrive at ALP - AO refers it to the TPO who in turn recommends rejection of the comparables decided by the assessee and makes alternate suggestions - AO makes additions and CIT(A) upholds it - TPO cannot summarily reject the detailed analysis done by the assessee to choose the comparabales and pick up arbitrary parametres to select comparables and also pick up certain paras of the OECD guidelines to peddle the cause of TNMM and ignore the mandatory section and rules of the domestic laws - Too many errors in the method applied by the TPO and the additions made cannot be sustained - Assessee's appeal allowed:DELHI ITAT; Income Tax - Capital gains - Assessee buys plots, builds flats, sells them for profit and treats it as business income - AO declines to accept the sale consideration declared and refers the case to Valuation Officer - On basis of DVO's report, higher tax demanded for increased sale consideration - CIT(A) finds that for the assessee it was just an adventure in trade and the AO rightly treated it as a case of capital gains but Revenue has no evidence and any other justification to increase the quantum of sale considration merely on the basis of DVO report - Since the CIT(A) had verified the sale consideration as per the registered deed and the money received in the assessee's bank account, there is no valid ground for the AO to enhance the sale consideration - Revenue's appeal disallowed:DELHI ITAT; Income Tax - Assessee claims Sec 80HHC benefits - AO asks assessee to submit separate trading account of purchase and sale of certain items - Since assessee maintained single account of all the trading items, it failed to do so - AO makes additions, denying exports benefits - CIT(A) allows it and Tribunal upholds it - While computing total income, the AO has to allow deduction for profits derived from exports - Tribunal's order upheld - Revenue's appeal dismissed: P&H HIGH COURT; 2007-TIOL-645-HC-KERALA-IT.doc Income Tax - Assessee is a partnership firm - Return filed and summary assessment u/s 143(1)(a) completed - Notice for scrutiny - Assessee alleges limitation and merit of the notice issued u/s 143(2) - Commissioner (A) agrees with the AO - Tribunal sets aside the order as time-barred - Revenue initiates proceedings u/s 148, alleging escapement of income - Single Judge of High Court allows Revenue to re-assess only escaped income and assessee directed to file detailed objection to the notice before the AO - AO disposes off appeal and intimates the assessee its intention to tax the escaped income - Assessee once again goes back to the High Court - Since the Revenue only intends to tax the escaped income as pointed out by the Commissioner (A), the assessee directed to file objections to the Revenue - Writ is unnecessary: KERALA HIGH COURT; Income Tax - Assessee's factory was closed for a couple of years and when it resumed manufacturing, it claimed deduction for carry forward losses - Revenue denies benefits in view of Board Circular superseding earlier Circular giving benefits of carry forward losses to sick company - CIT(A) and Tribunal allow the set off - Circular issued u/s 119 is binding on the Departmental authorities and cannot be withdrawn retrspectively as they could operate only prospectively as per settled law by the Apex Court - Benefit conferred by the earlier Circular cannot be taken away a prospective Circular - Revenue's appeal dismissed: MADRAS HIGH COURT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
Mr Jogendra Singh is new Chairman of Settlement Commission for Customs & Excise; Order issued; 2007-TIOL-1723-CESTAT-MUM.doc + win story.doc Revenue wins 2.6 crore case - Tribunal is satisfied that the appellants had suppressed vital information from the department - Demand not time barred -Since their conduct not clean, revenue neutrality cannot be advanced to support claim of bonafide, says Tribunal - Appeal rejected:MUMBAI CESTAT; Amount voluntarily paid before issuance of show cause notice - Mandatory penalty and interest imposable in view of Bombay HC decision in Padmashri V.V.Patil S.S.S.K. Ltd., 2007-TIOL-419-HC-MUM-CX however the same cannot be demanded in respect of period prior to September 1996 when these sections were introduced - Matter remanded.:MUMBAI CESTAT; Modvat originally availed on the basis of duplicate copy of the Invoice and the same were produced before the Range Superintendent who verified and defaced the same - no objection was raised at this point of time - later they were lost and hence Xerox copies were produced on demand - Denial of modvat credit is on technical ground & not in accordance with the principles of natural justice - no dispute about the duty paid character of the input, their receipt in the Appellants factory and their utilization in the manufacture of the final product.:MUMBAI CESTAT;
SERVICE TAX SECTION 2007-TIOL-1726-CESTAT-BANG.doc + bas story.doc Service Tax - CHA and Steamer agent cannot be classified under Business Auxiliary Service: BANGALORE CESTAT; ST - Real Estate Agent - Penalty levied for delayed return and payment of tax - Commissioner enhances penalty in a review order - Assessee goes to High Court - Matter remanded - In view of the Larger Bench order in the ETA Engineering case, Tribunal finds the enhanced penalty well within reasonable limit - Assessee's appeal dismissed:MUMBAI CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION NOTIFICATION CBEC amends Not 39/2005 for reviewing many OIO; CASE LAWS 2007-TIOL-647-HC-MUM-COFEPOSA.doc + cofeposa story.doc Customs - Merely walking through "red channel" does not mean that concealed goods were not smuggled - COFEPOSA detention upheld: BOMBAY HIGH COURT Customs – smuggling – confiscation of Indian Currency as sale proceeds of the goods allegedly smuggled – the impugned order mostly relied on the retracted statements of the persons concerned - the department relied on circumstantial evidence which is not complete in its chain and does not lead to irresistible conclusion that the appellant indulged in importing the disputed goods – impugned order is not sustainable – seized currency shall be returned: MUMBAI CESTAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
Revenue loses latest Transfer Pricing case; Bankers continue to bank on hidden service charges; RBI needs to consider ULA-option! CESTAT is a success story, and DRs deserve no less credit; CAT case (OA No. 488/2004) filed in New Delhi Bench regarding Demand on enhanced HRA to the Postal Staff working at DLF Qutab Enclave, Palam Vihar, Dundahera, Badshapur and Sector-45 Pos near Gurgaon - Judgment thereof - Regarding RBI eases guidelines for direct receipt of import documents for rough diamond; Ranbaxy and Astellas opt for truce over Flomax; OECD Anti-Bribery Convention: India, China to attend meet in Rome; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Regards Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. |
