Export obligation removed by notification, customs duty demand invalidated; penalties under s.112 and s.114AA quashed due to inadmissible s.108 statem...
Customs officers must wear and use department-issued body-worn cameras when clearing passenger baggage, with daily secure transfer and 30-day retentio...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10021 to 10040 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal and affirmed the CIT(A)'s rulings: the sales-tax/excise incentive granted to the assessee was held to be a capital receipt as it constituted a subsidy to encourage establishment of industry in the earthquake-affected district; disallowances under s.14A read with Rule 8D were deleted insofar as only investments yielding exempt income were to be considered for computation, and the CIT(A)'s reliance on precedent of the Special Bench and High Court was upheld; the TUF subsidy was held to be capital in nature and not taxable; and additions under Explanation 1(f) to s.115JB were to be computed without applying s.14A/Rule 8D. All grounds in Revenue's appeal were dismissed.
The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal and affirmed the CIT(A)'s rulings: the sales-tax/excise incentive granted to the assessee was held to be a capital receipt as it constituted a subsidy to encourage establishment of industry in the earthquake-affected district; disallowances under s.14A read with Rule 8D were deleted insofar as only investments yielding exempt income were to be considered for computation, and the CIT(A)'s reliance on precedent of the Special Bench and High Court was upheld; the TUF subsidy was held to be capital in nature and not taxable; and additions under Explanation 1(f) to s.115JB were to be computed without applying s.14A/Rule 8D. All grounds in Revenue's appeal were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.