Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The coordinate benches of the Tribunal have consistently decided the issue of availment of CENVAT credit by insurance companies on invoices issued by dealers or manufacturers, holding that such credit is permissible when service tax has undisputedly been paid to the government. The High Court cannot sit in appeal over its earlier final order in the same matter. The doctrine of precedents mandates that a coordinate bench is bound by the final order of another coordinate bench. The dissent by the Member (Technical) of the Tribunal, derogating from the consistent view of coordinate benches, and referring the matter to a Third Member, is impermissible. Consequently, the prejudicial portion of the order by the Member (Technical) is quashed.
The coordinate benches of the Tribunal have consistently decided the issue of availment of CENVAT credit by insurance companies on invoices issued by dealers or manufacturers, holding that such credit is permissible when service tax has undisputedly been paid to the government. The High Court cannot sit in appeal over its earlier final order in the same matter. The doctrine of precedents mandates that a coordinate bench is bound by the final order of another coordinate bench. The dissent by the Member (Technical) of the Tribunal, derogating from the consistent view of coordinate benches, and referring the matter to a Third Member, is impermissible. Consequently, the prejudicial portion of the order by the Member (Technical) is quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
