COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. UNITED PROVINCES ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO

In the result, appeal is allowed

transfer, in a scheme of amalgamation, of any asset by the amalgamating company to the amalgamated company where the amalgamated company is an Indian company; Section 41 is under the heading Computation of Business Income. The entire section makes it abundantly clear that income arising as provided therein is to be considered as income of business or profession

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

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

transfer of the CGP share and not by virtue of various clauses of SPA. In a case like the present one, where the structure has existed for a considerable length of time generating taxable revenues right from 1994 and where the court is satisfied that the transaction satisfies all the parameters of “participation in 66 investment” then in such

M/S. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. (UNIT BHILAI STEEL PLANT) ISPAT BHAWAN . THROUGH ITS SR. MANAGER (F AND A) vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE RAIPUR

Bench: Us. 2. Very Briefly Put, The Question Which We Are Called Upon To Consider & Resolve Is As To Whether Interest Is Payable On The Differential Excise Duty With Retrospective Effect That Become Payable On The Basis Of Escalation Clause Under Section 11Ab Of The Central Excise Act, 1944 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”). 3. In This Batch Of Appeals, We Will Treat C.A. No.2150/2012 As The Leading Case. We Will Refer To The Said Case As The Sail Case. In The Said Case Originally, The Appellant Company Which Is Manufacturer Of Various Products Including Rail

transfers. 40. It is no doubt true that the accrual of income does not much later depend upon its ascertainment or the accounts cast by assessee. The accounts may be made up at a much later date. That depends upon the convenience of the assessee and also upon the exigencies of the situation. The amount of the income, profits

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX GUJARAT, AHMEDABAD vs. SURAT ART SILK CLOTH MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, SURAT

114 F-G] The first three heads of "charitable purpose" in s. 2(15) of the Act arc defined in specific terms. namely, relief of the poor, education and medical relief. The fourth head is described generally as a residuary head. The 83 definition of "charitable purpose" with reference to the fourth head shows that the purpose is the "advancement

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

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

114 (iv) Non-statutory bodies - ERNET, NIXI and GS1 India ................................................................... 116 (v) State Cricket Associations.............................................................................................................. 122 (vi) Private trusts ................................................................................................................................... 135 IV. Summation of conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 141 A. General test under Section 2(15) ............................................................................................................ 141 B. Authorities, corporations, or bodies established by statute .................................................................... 142 C. Statutory regulators ................................................................................................................................ 143 D. Trade promotion bodies .......................................................................................................................... 144 E. Non-statutory bodies ............................................................................................................................... 144 F. Sports associations

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

transfer to the copy/copies any copyright or other marking on the Software or Documentation. d) not use the Software or Documentation for any other purpose than permitted in this Article 20, License or sell or in any manner alienate or part with its possession. e) not use or transfer the Software and/or the Documentation outside India without the written consent

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

Appeals are dismissed

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

114 : 1960 SCC OnLine SC 193        Civil Appeal No.3291­3294 of 2009, etc. Page 8 of 45 apply.  It was submitted that in the case of many Banks, for   several   assessment   years,   the   assessment   officer allowed the deduction of interest for the broken period. Reliance was placed on a decision of this Court in the case of M/s. Radhasoami Satsang

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX- vs. ,NEW DELHI VS M/S ORACLE SOFTWARE INDIA LTD

price of the licensed product. The only right which the assessee has is to replicate or duplicate the software. They do not have any right to vary, amend or make value addition to the software embedded in the Master Media. According to the assessee, it uses machinery to convert blank CDs into recorded CDs which along with other processes become

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE vs. COMMR.OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs

114 to 116 of the paper book of S.L.P.(C) No.6757 of 2007) states that “Agricultural Produce Marketing Boards” 8 and “Agricultural Marketing Societies” are not entitled to exemption after insertion of the said Explanation in Section 10 (20) of the 1961 Act. According to learned counsel AMC(s) is neither “Agricultural Produce Marketing Board” nor “Agricultural Marketing Society”. Therefore

M/S. LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-II

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Us. The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act. It Undertook A Contract For Construction Of Bridges For M/S. Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. (’Konkan Railway’, For Short), Which Is A Public Sector Undertaking. Appellant Manufactured Pre Stressed Concrete Girders (Psc Girders). It Used To Transport Them To The Site Of Construction Of Bridges Of The Railways. It Did Not Register Itself With The Authorities Of The Central Excise. 2. Alleging That The Appellant, For The Period March 1993 & December 1994, Although Was Involved In The Manufacturing Activity, By Undertaking Manufacture Of 75 Psc Girders, But Did Not Pay Any Excise Duty Thereupon. 3. A Notice Was Issued To The Appellant Directing It To Show Cause As To Why Central Excise Duty To The Tune Of Rs.32,35,575/- Should Not Be Demanded & Recovered From Them In Terms Of The Proviso Appended To Rule 49(1) Of The Central Excise Rules, 1944 (Rules) Read With Section 11A Of The Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944 (Act) & As To Why Penalty Should Not Be Imposed On Them & The Plant & Machinery & The Manufactured Goods Should Not Be Confiscated. Cause Was Shown By The Appellant Inter Alia Stating That No Excise Duty Was Payable. The Said Notice Was Withdrawn Stating: "The Said Show Cause Notice Has Been Issued Without Obtaining Approval Of The Proper Authority Or By The Proper Officer. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice Dated 27.1.94 Hereby Withdrawn.

114) ELT 421 (Tri.-Delhi)]; M. Ramachandra Rao vs. CCE, Guntur, [2005 (186) ELT 353 (Tr.- Bangalore)]; Raghunath Ramachandra Shanbag vs. CCE, Mumbai-VII, [2004 (178) ELT 488 (Tr.-Mumbai)]; and Gammon India Ltd. vs. CCE, Goa, [2002 (146) ELT 173], which held the field at the relevant point of time. 10. Questions involving similar cases came for consideration before

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

114 (E), dated the 1st March, 1997 or No. 20/2002-Central Excise, dated the 1st March, 2002) and used in the manufacture of the final products in any other place in India, in case the unit pays excise duty under section 3 of the Act read with notification No. 2/95- Central Excise, dated the 4th January, 1995, number G.S.R

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH vs. T.N. ARVINDA REDDY

Section 54(1)-Scope of-Words & Phrases-Purchase-Meaning of. HEADNOTE: The respondent sold his house at a price sufficient to attract capital gins but he pre-empted the demand of tax by acquiring the common house from his brothers for a consideration of Rs 30,000/- each through separate release deeds. On behalf of the Petitioner, it was contended

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE vs. M/S NESTLE INDIA LTD

transferred only to two sister concerns and no sale is involved, the assessable value of instant tea removed to the respondent’s own units would be determined on the basis of the export price of similar goods and not 115% of the cost of production. 2 Page 3 JUDGMENT 3. The order in original dated 31.5.2006 passed by the Additional

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 66 D. The relevant part

PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) vs. LALJIBHAI KANJIBHAI MANDALIA

The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the High

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

transferred a sum of Rs. 6 crores on 01.06.2016 and Rs. 4 crores on 21.06.2016 to M/s Goan Recreation Clubs Private Ltd. The assessee secured the loan by way of a mortgage of the property forming part of Survey No. 31/1-A situated in Village Bambolim, Distt. North Goa. It is an admitted fact that the assessee became the Director