M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASING CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

exemption from tax, of a sum which had been allowed as a trading liability, on accrual basis, in the hands of the transferee company which had ceased to exist. The Revenue disallowed that claim; that view was upheld. This Court stated that : (SCC pp. 679-81, paras 5-6) “5. … In amalgamation two or more companies are fused into

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

exemptions from the payment of stamp duty or taxes or any other charges, if payable, in accordance with law. 8 On 2 April 2013, MSIL intimated the assessing officer of the amalgamation. The case was selected for scrutiny by the issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) on 26 September 2013, followed by a notice under Section

M/S MARUTI SUZUKI LTD. vs. COMMR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE-III,DELHI

price, excluding sales tax and other taxes, if any, paid on such goods, of the exempted final product charged by the manufacturer for the sale of such goods at the time of their clearance from the factory; 2 (c) the provider of output service shall utilize credit only to extent of an amount not exceeding twenty per cent

M/S. MODIPON FIBRE COMPANY vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT

transferred to its depot in Surat for sale therefrom; that in the said price declaration, the assessee had indicated variety-wise ex-depot sale price, amount of various deductions for sales tax, freight, discount, TOT, excise duty etc.; that in the price declaration, the assessee had also declared the assessable http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page

DELHI FARMING & CONSTRUCTION(P) LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, we set aside the judgment of the High Court and uphold the

exempted from capital gains and not part of the ’gross income’ or the distributable income for the purpose of section 104 of the Act. The High Court rejected the contention of the appellant-assessee by emphasising that the capital gain was part of assessable income of the assessee, following the view taken by other High Courts as in Cardamom Marketing

VODAFONE IDEA LTD(EARLIER KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 26 (2)

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Transfer Pricing Adjustment, Capitalization of Licence Fees, 3G Spectrum Fees, Asset Restoration Cost Obligation including the effect of amalgamation of group entities which required thorough scrutiny and determination. G] During the pendency of said Writ Petition, a letter was issued by the respondent No.1 on 23.07.2018, the relevant portion of which was as under :- "The assessment years for which request

M/S. ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD. vs. COMNR. OF CUSTOMS

Appeals are dismissed but in

price is not the transfer of a chattel qua chattel, the contract is one of work and labour. After referring to the http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 28 earlier decisions of this Court in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Associated Hotels of India Ltd. (1972) 29 STC 474 and the State of Madras

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX vs. M/S SUZLON ENERGY LTD

Appeals stand disposed of in terms of

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

transfer of goods for a price cannot be subject to service tax. 4.7 It is submitted that it is true that different aspects of a transaction can be taxed through separate provisions. The aspect theory permits taxation of two different aspects or features of a transaction. For instance, in a catering contract, supply of food was subject to value added

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR-I vs. M/S. INDORAMA SYNTHETICS (I) LTD

exempted by the statutory notification issued by the Central Government, being Notification No. 31/1997-CUS, and it is because of the benefit availed by the assessee under this Notification that it is able to effect supply of polyester staple fiber on discounted price to an ultimate exporter holding advance licence. Therefore, the additional discount offered to a customer

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR vs. M/S. SUPER SYNOTEX (INDIA) LTD.

In the result, both sets of appeals stand disposed of

exemption, sales tax is neither collectable nor payable and if still an assessee collects any amount on the head of sales tax, that would become the price of the goods. Therefore, an incentive scheme of the present nature has to be treated on a different footing because the sales tax is collected and a Page 21 JUDGMENT 21 part

VATSALA SHENOY vs. JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

exemption in whole or in part by complying with legal provisions (like Section 54-F). 9 (2009) 8 SCC 412 Page 24 JUDGMENT 24 17. Section 45(1) of the 1961 Act speaks about capital gains arising out of “transfer” of a capital asset. The definition of the expression “transfer” is contained in Section

THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

exempt   from taxation   under   the   CBR   Notification   No.   35 dated 20­10­1934 and No. 33 dated 18­8­1945.” In paragraphs 9 and 10, this Court proceeded to hold thus: “9. In the instant case the cooperative society (the appellant) is a Bank. One of its objects is to carry  on the  general  business of Banking. Like other Banks money is its stock­in­trade

COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX DELHI vs. QUICK HEAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

In the result, the appeals are allowed

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

exempted excise duty   on   such   “packaged   software   or   canned software”.” 15 24. He vehemently submitted that the transaction cannot be bifurcated into two components as suggested by the revenue i.e. (i) sale of CD, and (ii) supply of updates. In this regard, he submitted as under :­ “7.1 During the arguments, the Department submitted that apart from the sale

HMM LTD. vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI

transferred." (emphasis added) The first proviso to the notification lays down that the procedure set out in the Appendix to the notification will have to be followed for availing of the credit for the duty paid on the inputs. The Appendix provides that +the manufacturer will+have to give a declaration to the Superintendent of Central Excise having jurisdiction over

M/S. PUROLATOR INDIA LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-III

Appeal is disposed of accordingly

transfers, the appellant filed declarations under Rule 173C with the excise department. In these declarations, the appellant claimed deduction towards Sales Tax, Cash Discount and Volume Discount on excise duty payable to arrive at the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. 3. Apart from undertaking manufacturing activities, the appellant at times also receives

GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

transfer of shares of Mauritius resident taxable in that country and under Mauritius tax laws capital gain is totally exempt, entire transaction used to escape the tax net. Thus to plug this loop hole in the statute, Section 115QA is introduced to provide that where shares are bought back at a price

COMMNR. OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI vs. M/S. B.V. JEWELS AND ORS.'

The appeals are allowed to the extent indicated

exempted material. Customs Notification 177/1994- Cus at Para 7 (i) stipulates the goods imported by a unit in EPZ can be transferred to other unit only with the prior permission of Asstt. Commissioner of Customs of the Zone, which has not been done. Diamonds are restricted for import and import without licence allowed only to EPZ unit under EXIM Policy

COMMNR. OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PARASRAMPURIA SYNTHETICS LTD

transfer of technology for the purpose of setting up a plant to manufacture Polyester, Polyester Filament Yarn and Polyester Staple Fiber: whereas the assessee contended that the goods so imported are covered under Sl. No.10 of the Notification No. 25/95 cus dated 16.3.1995 having ’Nil’ rate of duty: The Revenue contended that the goods fall under Sl.No