Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Subsidy received under the State Mega Project incentive scheme was held revenue in nature because it was linked to electricity duty/stamp duty exemptions and VAT/CST-linked promotion subsidy, not to acquisition of any specific fixed asset; Explanation 10 to section 43(1) was inapplicable and the receipt was taxable as income under section 2(24)(xviii), rejecting the claim of capital receipt/exemption. CPC's prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(ii) adding the subsidy was upheld since the return contained an apparent mismatch and incomplete exempt-income disclosure, warranting correction, and the first appellate order was reversed. Disallowance of delayed employees' PF/ESIC was remanded to examine the "advance deposit" plea. Alleged understatement of duty drawback was remanded for reconciliation. - ITAT
Subsidy received under the State Mega Project incentive scheme was held revenue in nature because it was linked to electricity duty/stamp duty exemptions and VAT/CST-linked promotion subsidy, not to acquisition of any specific fixed asset; Explanation 10 to section 43(1) was inapplicable and the receipt was taxable as income under section 2(24)(xviii), rejecting the claim of capital receipt/exemption. CPC's prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(ii) adding the subsidy was upheld since the return contained an apparent mismatch and incomplete exempt-income disclosure, warranting correction, and the first appellate order was reversed. Disallowance of delayed employees' PF/ESIC was remanded to examine the "advance deposit" plea. Alleged understatement of duty drawback was remanded for reconciliation. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
