COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS vs. M/S. MADURAI MILLS CO. LIMITED

section 10 (2) (vii) of the Act observed that the expression "sale" in its ordinary meaning is a transfer of property for a price, and adjustment of the rights of the partners in a dissolved firm by allotment of its assets (1) [1960] 39 I.T.R. 123. (2) [1968] 68

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

Appeals are dismissed but in

Section 28(1) of the said Act was Rs. 26,68,310/-. In response to the show-cause notice, the appellants sent their replies, inter-alia, submitting that what was imported were not goods and there could be no excise duty on services since the remittances were in Form A-2 and tax at source under the Income

LIPI BOILERS LTD. THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABAD

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

price cannot be considered as the ‘transaction value’ for the purpose of determining the payable central excise duty on the boiler, which in turn would also mean that the value of the bought out goods is not liable to be included in the value of the boiler for computing central excise duty. (ii). Whether the resultant final product

M/S D. N. SINGH THROUGH PARTNER DUDHESHWAR NATH SINGH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

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

price, has been placed in possession of the houses as an owner and is using the buildings for the purpose of its business in its own right. Still the assessee has been denied the benefit of Section 32. On the other hand, the Housing Board would be denied the benefit of Section 32 because in spite of its being

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

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

transfer of rights for performing and undertaking regulatory or administrative duties for general public interest, when these are not guided and undertaken with profit motive or intent. Further, reliance was placed on The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh v. M/s Hoshiarpur Improvement Trust, Hoshiarpur64 to explain the characteristics of the assessee. Learned counsel further laid emphasis on provisions

M/S M.S.SHOES EAST LTD. vs. COMMR.OF CUSTOMS,NEW DELHI

price referred to in that sub-section in respect of imported goods shall be determined in accordance with the rules made in this behalf. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of sub-section (1A), if the Board is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, fix tariff

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

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

price of shares. Therefore, in the mechanism of capital gains computation, what is relevant is not only the sale of shares but also the purchase of shares. Thus, the entire transaction of acquisition as well as sale 14 of shares, as a whole, is required to be examined, and a dissecting approach by examining only the sale of shares

M.J.EXPORTS LTD. vs. CUSTOMS,EX.&GOLD(CONTROL)APP.TRI

transferred by him to another. But it is not proper to read them as permitting a sale of goods outside the country. Note (44) in Appendix 6 also carries a mild indication that the equipment permitted to be imported is only for the purposes of use in the country. [320 B-F] Janak Photo Enterprises (1990) 49 E.L.T. 339, distinguished

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

THE MEMBER FOR THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX, ASSAM vs. SMT. SINDHURANI CHAUDHURANI.(with connected appeals)

In the result appeal No. 162 of 1955 brought by the State of

section 68 of that Act. 4. Salami is realized when lands are relet after eviction. 5. Salami is not in the nature of a present. It is a compulsory payment by the tenant to the landlord at the inception of the tenancy. In the Statement of the Case the Board said that the zamindar’s business or vocation was letting

M/S. UDAYANI SHIP BREAKERS LTD. vs. COMMNR.OF CUSTOMS &CENTRAL EXCISE,RAJKOT

68,49,839.00 and has actually been paid by the importer to the exporter abroad. No other price can be taken into consideration for determining the assessable value in this case either in terms of the main definition of the term "value" given under sub-Section (1) of Section 14 of the Act or in terms of sub-Rule

M/S. UDAYANI SHIP BREAKERS LTD. vs. COMMNR.OF CUSTOMS &CENTRAL EXCISE,RAJKOT

68,49,839.00 and has actually been paid by the importer to the exporter abroad. No other price can be taken into consideration for determining the assessable value in this case either in terms of the main definition of the term "value" given under sub-Section (1) of Section 14 of the Act or in terms of sub-Rule

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

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

price list and thus the demand of duty having been raised beyond the period of six months is barred by limitation. c) for the same reason as in (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

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

COMMNR.,INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. K. RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR

68,811, in the total turnover while arriving at export profits under Section 80HHC(3) of the Act, as it stood at the material time. 6. According to A.O., the gross total income of the assessee was Rs.1,94,08,220 from which an amount of Rs.1,74,13,200 (90%) was deducted in terms of clause

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

transfer of the right to use goods, delivery   of   the   goods   is   not   a   condition   precedent,   but   the delivery of goods may be one of the elements of the transaction; (iv)   the   effective   or   general   control   does   not   mean   always physical control and, even if the manner, method, modalities and the time of the use of goods is decided

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX vs. M/S SAFARI RETREATS PRIVATE LIMITED

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

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

price of services they supply, i.e., renting/leasing/letting out, etc. Further, CGST is leviable on the supply of these services, resulting in tax on tax or the cascading effect of tax. Moreover, due to the denial of ITC, the assessees have to bear the tax burden. Thus, the interpretation put by revenue to clauses (c) and (d) of Section

COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX vs. M/S ELEGANT DEVELOPERS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

transferred title of land to SICCL after negotiating the price thereof with the owners and procuring a Power of Attorney to execute the sale deeds. Hence, these activities were purely of sale/conveyance of immovable property which clearly falls within the exception as provided under Section 65B(44)(a)(i) of the Finance Act, 1994, reproduced supra. 44. Thus