ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 12AA(1) of the IT Act, on 18.05.1979 and is engaged in the activity of promotion of the export of all kind of ready-made garments, knitwear, and garments made of leather, jute and hemp. It does not per se engage in any activity for profit, and its mandate is to ensure that Indian apparel manufacturers, are given

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHELF DRILLING RON TAPPMEYER LIMITED

The appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

section in case of a conflict with what is contained in the non obstante clause as stated above. 83. Further, a non obstante clause has to be distinguished from the expression “subject to” where the latter would convey the idea of a provision yielding place to another provision or other provisions to which it is made subject to. Also

COMMISSIONER OF GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE vs. M/S CITIBANK N.A

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH

Section 66 B accompanied by the definition of service under Section 65B (44) and the legislature further providing for the negative 80 list of services which stood excluded from the levy of service tax in Section 66 D, the question would only be whether there is any service and whether it is excluded under Section

M/S.VIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-I

68,94,982.00 was the income in respect of which inaccurate particulars had been furnished. The tax was computed at Rs. 31,71,692.00. It was held that the tax sought to be evaded was Rs. 31,71,692.00 and imposed penalty of Rs. 31,71,692.00 (100% of the tax). The Commissioner of Income Tax confirmed the order

DILIP N. SHROFF vs. JOINT COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI &ANR

The appeal is allowed

68. The authorities did not arrive at a finding that the consideration http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 22 of 26 amount fixed for the sale of property was wholly inadequate. The authorities also do not show that what are the inaccurate particulars furnished by the Appellant. They also do not state that what should have been the accepted

M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI

The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Processing & Hence A Substantial Increase In The Value Of These Inputs Has Escaped Payment Of Duty On Account Of Value Addition In Such Inputs After Processing. More Specifically, What Was Alleged Was That Various Spare Parts Relatable To Motor Vehicles That Were Manufactured By The Appellant & Were Procured By It In The Form Of Bumpers, Grills, Etc., On Which The Process Of Electro Deposition Coating, Namely, Edc Took Place (Which Was In The Nature Of Anti-Rust So That The Shelf Life Of The Said Bumpers, Grills, Etc., Would Be Generally Increased) Have Escaped Duty On

68,07,499/- and proceeded also to impose an equivalent penalty of the same amount with the caveat that 25 per cent of the penalty amount would be payable if it is paid within 30 days of the date of communication of the order. The appeal filed before Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as Page 4

THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) vs. TIGER GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL II HOLDINGS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

68 133. One of the arguments of the Revenue before us was that the Mauritius route was not available to HTIL for the reason indicated above. In this connection, it was urged that the legal owner of HEL (Indian company) was not HTIL. Under the transaction, HTIL alone was the seller of the shares. VIH wanted to enter into

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) vs. M/S WELKIN FOODS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

section notes. It is only when (i) no clear pathway exists to determine classification under a chapter heading, i.e., absence of a definition or criterion, and (ii) there is ambiguity regarding the meaning and scope of a tariff item, that the possibility of invoking the common parlance test arises. 57. In Chemical and Fibres of India

HINDUSTAN POLES CORPORATION vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA

Appeals are allowed and show cause

section or Chapter notes of [The First Schedule] to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) as amounting to [manufacture; or] The word "manufacture" is a compound word of Latin origin derived from the words "manu," by hand and "facere," to do, to make, to form; but the meaning is not confined to that which is done

T.T.G.INDUSTRIES, MADRAS vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR

In the result this appeal is allowed and the order of the

b), no penalty can be imposed on the appellants". The cross objection filed by the Collector was not pressed. The members of the CEGAT differed in their opinions. While the judicial member was in favour of allowing the appeal, having found in favour of the appellant on all the three grounds urged by it, none of the grounds found favour