Indirect Taxes

Supreme court

Supreme Court Directs Andhra Pradesh To Transfer To Jharkhand CST Collected From Tata Motors In Respect To Sale To APSRTC

Case Title: Tata Motors Limited Versus Central Sales Tax Appellate Authority & Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 847

The Supreme Court has directed the state of Andhra Pradesh to transfer to Jharkhand the amount of central sales tax deposited by Tata Motors with respect to the sale of buses to the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC).

The division bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari observed that after due verification, the amount of central sales tax paid by Tata Motors with respect to the transaction be transferred to Jharkhand immediately on verification. The State of Jharkhand was directed to adjust it towards the central sales tax liability of Tata Motors on sales effected through RSO, Vijayawada with respect to vehicles/buses sold to APSRTC, which were found to be in the nature of inter-state sales.

Delhi High Court

SCN Without Any Reasons: Delhi High Court Quashes Order Cancelling GST Registration

Case Title: Balaji Enterprises Versus Principal Additional Director General

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 986

The Delhi High Court has quashed the order cancelling the GST registration as the Range Inspector has physically verified the premises, neither by serving any notice of the physical verification nor in the report generated after the verification was uploaded on the portal.

The division bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju has observed that there was an infraction of the provisions of Rule 25 of the CGST and the order has gone beyond the frame of the Show Cause Notice.

Delhi High Court Directs IGST Refund After Deducting Differential Amount Of Duty Drawback

Case Title: Kishan Lal Kuria Mal International versus Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 949

The Delhi High Court has directed the department to grant IGST refund paid on the goods exported after deducting the differential amount of duty drawback.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has observed that the Jurisdictional Commissionerates shall be entitled to verify the extent of duty drawback availed by the petitioners and also whether they have availed duty drawback/CENVAT Credit of Central Excise & Service Tax component in respect of the exports made by them. If any adjustment is to be made, it shall be made by the jurisdictional commissionerate.

Preventing Docket Explosion - Pre-SCN Consultation Should Be Held : Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/s Victory Electric Vehicles International Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 950

The Delhi High Court has held that it is obligatory on the part of the concerned officer to ensure that prior to the issuance of the show-cause notice (SCN), a pre-notice consultation is held with the person chargeable with customs duty or interest.

The division bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju has observed that the person chargeable with duty or interest was required to be given fifteen days to make his submission, in writing, concerning the grounds communicated to him in the pre-consultation notice, which is required to be served prior to the issuance of the SCN.

Rate Reduction Benefit By Reduction In Prices: Delhi High Court Directs Loreal To Deposit Principal Profiteered Amount

Case Title: Loreal India Private Limited Versus Union Of India

The Delhi High Court has directed Loreal to deposit the principal profiteered amount after deducting the GST imposed on the net profiteered amount in six equal instalments.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has observed that the interest amount directed to be paid by the department as well as the penalty proceedings and investigation by the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) in respect of other products sold by Loreal has stayed till further orders.

Bombay High Court

Subleasing Of Containers; Deemed Sale, Service Tax Not Applicable; Bombay High Court

Case Title: Nayana Premji Savala versus The Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 404

The Bombay High Court has ruled that service tax would be applicable on transfer of goods only in cases where there is no "transfer of right to use" the said goods.

The bench of Justices K. R. Shriram and A. S. Doctor ruled that in view of Article 366(29A)(d) of the Constitution of India, transfer of right to use goods is a deemed sale, which is subject to Sales Tax/VAT. The Court added that Article 366 (29A) of the Constitution does not distinguish between an owner or a lessor of the goods. Thus, the bench ruled that lease of goods for valuable consideration on a "transfer of right to use" basis is a deemed sale, even if the transferor is not the owner of the said goods.

Financial Benefits To Assessee Can't Be A Ground To Levy Interest Without A Statutory Provision: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. versus Union of India & Ors.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that penalty or interest on additional customs duty (CVD) and special additional duty of customs (SAD), or surcharge, which is not connected to the basic customs duty, cannot be imposed in the absence of an explicit substantive provision.

The Division Bench of Justices K.R. Shriram and A.S. Doctor observed that there was no substantive provision which obligated the assessee to pay interest or penalty on CVD or SAD, leviable under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, or on the surcharge leviable under the Finance Act, 2000.

Bombay High Court Allows Taxpayer To Utilise Amount Available In Electronic Credit Ledger to Pay Pre-Deposit

Case Title: Oasis Realty Versus The Union of India

The Bombay High Court has held that the taxpayer may utilise the amount available in the Electronic Credit Ledger to pay the 10% of tax in dispute as prescribed under Sub-section (6) of Section 107 of the CGST Act.

The division bench of Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice A.S. Doctor restored the appeal on the taxpayer's promise to debit the Electronic Credit Ledger within one week of the order being uploaded towards the 10% payable under Section 107(6)(b).

Minimum 30 Days Time To Be Granted To File Reply To GST SCN: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Sheetal Dilip Jain Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

The Bombay High Court has held that Section 73(8) of the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act (MGST Act) permits a person chargeable with tax for a period of 30 days from the issuance of the show-cause notice to make payment of such tax along with interest payable. If he does not wish to make payment, then within the 30 day period he could file a reply to the show-cause notice.

The division bench of Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice A.S. Doctor has observed that to file a reply to the show-cause notice, the statutory period cannot be arbitrarily reduced to 7 days by the assessing officer.

Calcutta High Court

GST Proceedings Initiated By Anti Evasion And Range Office For The Same Period Is Not Permissible: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: M/s. R. P. Buildcon Private Limited & Anr. Vs. The Superintendent, CGST & CX

The Calcutta High Court has held that since the audit proceedings under Section 65 of the CGST Act have already commenced, it is appropriate that the proceedings should be taken to their logical end. The proceedings initiated by the Anti-Evasion and Range Office for the same period will not be continued.

The division bench of Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya has observed that three wings of the same department are proceeding against the appellants for the same period.

Calcutta High Court Directs State Government To Make Scheme Providing Industrial Incentives GST- Compliant

Case Title: Emami Agrotech Ltd. versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that industrial units cannot be kept in a limbo and denied the incentives, which were specifically promised to them, on the ground of change of the tax regime from VAT to GST.

The Single Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya held that the issue of legitimate expectation was involved in the case, and hence, the Court directed the Department of Industry, Commerce and Enterprises, Government of West Bengal and the Finance Department, to make the Scheme providing incentives to industries GST-compliant.

Kerala High Court

VAT Defaulter Not Liable To Pay Collection Charges If Opts Amnesty Scheme: Kerala High Court

Case Title: B. Madhukumar Vs Commercial Tax Officer

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 540

The Kerala High Court has held that collection charges are not payable if a VAT defaulter opts for the Kerala Amnesty Scheme, 2017.

The single bench of Gopinath P. has noted that the petitioner had settled the liabilities in terms of the provisions contained in the Amnesty Scheme of 2017, which was introduced by the provisions contained in the Kerala Finance Act 2017.

Andhra Pradesh High Court

Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Rejection Of GST Refund Application By Axis Bank

Case Title: Axis Bank Ltd. Versus The Union Of India

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has quashed the rejection of a GST refund application by Axis Bank and remanded the matter back to the original authority.

The division bench of Justice C. Praveen Kumar and Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu has referred to a circular dated 25.09.2021 issued clarifying that the insertion of rule (1A) to Rule 89 provides a time limit of 2 years. The two-year time limit would apply from the date of the introduction of the said rule and not from the date of payment of GST.

Madras High Court

Detention Order not Passed based on Statutory Timelines: Madras High Court Directs Release of Vehicle

Case Title: A. Irudayaraju Versus The State Tax Officer, Adjudication Cell

The Madras High Court has ordered the release of the vehicle as the department has failed to pass the detention order within the period as provided for under Section 129 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TNGST Act) and no show cause notice has been issued within the period of 7 days as set out under Section 129(3) of the TNGST Act.

The single bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has observed that since the statutory show cause notice is to be issued within a period of 7 days from the date of interception, it becomes incumbent upon the authorities to pass an order of detention prior thereto.

GST Dept. To Consider Reply to SCN Sent By Assessee Through post and Not Portal: Madras High Court

Case Title: Asia (Chennai) Engineering Company Private Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 431

The Madras High Court has held that the GST Department should consider a reply to a show cause notice even if it is sent by the assessee through the post and not the portal.

While rejecting the objection of the department that the postal/physical reply to them shall not be considered, the single bench of Justice M. Nirmal Kumar has directed the department to give an opportunity for personal hearing to the petitioner, hear the objections, peruse the documents submitted and the explanations.

Failure To Issue ASMT 10 In Respect Of Aspects Forming Subject Matter Of Proceedings Vitiates Entire Proceedings: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Vadivel Pyrotech Private Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 438

The Madras High Court has held that ASMT 10 is mandatory before proceeding to issue GST DRC-01. Failure to issue ASMT 10 in respect of the discrepancies forming the subject matter in GST DRC-01 culminating in GST DRC-07 would vitiate the entire proceedings.

The single bench of Justice Mohammed Shaffiq has observed that any proceeding in GST DRC-01A/1 culminating in an Order in GST DRC-07, if pursuant to scrutiny under Section 61 of the TNGST Act, ought to be preceded by the issuance of Form ASMT 10.

Orissa High Court

Appellate Authority To Bear In Mind The Predicaments Faced By Taxpayers On Introduction Of GST Procedures: Orissa High Court

Case Title: Durga Raman Patnaik Vs Additional Commissioner of GST

The Orissa High Court has held that the Appellate Authority should have borne in mind the predicament faced by taxpayers on the introduction of a new set of procedures by way of the promulgation of the CGST Act and rules and that time is required to be taken to get acquainted.

The division bench of Justice Jaswant Singh and Justice Murahari Sri Raman has observed that it preferred to exercise its writ jurisdiction to undo prejudice and injustice caused to the petitioner as the Appellate Tribunal has not yet been constituted as per Section 109 of the CGST Act. There was no alternative remedy available for the petitioner to question the veracity of the order passed in the first appeal.

Rajasthan High Court

GSTIN Linking Cannot Be Denied Merely For Providing Information In Wrong Form: Rajasthan High Court

Case Title: A.H. Marble Crafts, Through Proprietor Mohammad Afzal Vs Commissioner Tax

The Rajasthan High Court has held that the Goods and Service Tax Identification Number (GSTIN) link cannot be denied merely for providing information in the wrong form.

The division bench, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Kuldeep Mathur, has observed that absolute hyper-technical ground cannot be considered valid so as to deny the petitioner the opportunity to link the GSTIN of his father's firm with the new GSTIN number of the firm.

CESTAT

Customs Broker Is Responsible For Acts Of The Employees: CESTAT

Case Title: M/s Meghna Clearing and Forwarding P. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Export)

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that for the act of an employee, direct responsibility is fixed on the customs broker.

The bench of Dr. Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) has confirmed the penalty and relied on para 13(12) of the CHA Licencing Regulation, 2004 which says, "the customs broker shall exercise such supervision as may be necessary to ensure proper conduct of his employees in the transaction of business and he shall be held responsible for all acts and omissions of his employees during their employment."

Service Tax Not Leviable On Business Exhibition Service Performed Outside India: CESTAT

Case Title: Rama Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. Versus C.C.E. & S.T.

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that service tax is not leviable on business exhibition services performed outside India.

The two-member bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) observed that as per Rule 3 of Sub Rule (II) of the Taxation of Services (Provided from Outside India and Received in India) Rules 2006, a service can be taxable in the hand of the recipient of the service in India only when the part of the service is performed in India.

Change In Taxation Regime Should Not Affect Credit Availment Right Of Assessee: CESTAT

Case Title: M/s. Monochem Graphics Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & CGST, Delhi West

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that a change in the taxation regime should not affect the credit availment right of the assessee.

The bench of Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) observed that, under Section 174(2)(c) of the CGST Act, the appellant's right, privilege, and right to credit cannot be affected solely because the refund was rejected due to the limitation being passed after December 27, 2017.

CESTAT Allows Vodafone Idea To Avail CENVAT Credit Against Debit Notes

Case Title: Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise versus Vodafone Idea Limited

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed Vodafone Idea Limited to avail CENVAT credit on the debit notes issued to it, pertaining to reimbursements of diesel and electricity costs, on which service tax liability under Finance Act, 1994 had been discharged.

The Bench of Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) and C J Mathew (Technical Member) ruled that CENVAT credit can be availed against invoices or debit notes that contain substantially the same information as prescribed in Rule 9 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

No Liability On Vivo To Pay Customs Duty On Import Of Microphones Forming Part Of Mobile Phones: CESTAT

Case Title: Vivo Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner Customs

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Vivo is not liable to pay customs duty on the import of microphones as they form a part of cellular mobile phones.

The two-member bench of Rachna Gupta (Judicial member) and P. Venkata Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that only 10% of customs duty is being imposed upon such goods which are part of cellular mobile phones, except for microphones/wired headsets/receivers.

Clean Energy Cess To Be Imposed For Collection Of Cess On Polluting Fossil Fuels: CESTAT

Case Title: M/s. J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Central Goods & Service Tax

Citation: Excise Appeal No.51255 Of 2019

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the Clean Energy Cess has been imposed for the collection of cess on polluting fossil fuels so as to create additional funds for taking measures to reduce carbon emissions and pollution.

The two-member bench of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that under the Clean Energy Cess Rules, the cess has to be deposited through cash/PLA and cannot be deposited through debit to a cenvat credit account.

CESTAT Allows Refund Of Amount Reversed In CENVAT Credit Account To Reliance Industries

Case Title: Reliance Industries Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Reliance Industries Ltd. was ineligible for a refund of amounts that had, inadvertently, been reversed in the CENVAT credit account under rule 6(3A) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 between April 2010 and March 2011.

The two-member bench of Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) and C.J. Mathew (Accountant Member) has observed that Reliance Industries has not used any incremental input and input services for the manufacture of an exempted quantity of LPG and the entire quantum of inputs and input services was required for the manufacture of dutiable finished goods.

CENVAT Credit Eligible On Service Tax Paid By Registered Premises Even If Invoices Raised In The Name Of Unregistered Branch Office: CESTAT

Case Title: Desai and Diwanji Versus Commissioner of CGST

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the assessee is eligible for CENVAT Credit on service tax paid by registered premises even if invoices raised are in the name of an unregistered branch office.

The single bench of Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) has observed that in the event of centralised billing and centralised accounting systems, when one registration is permissible under Section 4(2), discharging Service Tax liability from the registered premises would not disentitle the benefits of CENVAT Credit on the Service Tax paid by the service provider if invoices are raised in the name of branch offices, even if the said branch offices are unregistered, since Service Tax liability has been discharged by the main office also for services provided by the branches.

Allegations Of Clandestine Removal Of Goods Merely Based On Entries In Diaries Not Sustainable: CESTAT

Case Title: M/s Raghuveer Rolling Mills Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur

The Allahabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the allegation of clandestine removal is merely based on the entries in diaries, etc. is not sustainable.

The bench of P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) has observed that the department has not adduced any additional evidence, even on a sample basis, to substantiate the allegation of clandestine removal.

Activity Of Printing Advertisement Content On PVC Material Amount to "Manufacturing", No Service Tax Payable: CESTAT

Case Title: Commissioner of Central Excise Versus Macro Media Digital Imaging Pvt. Ltd.

The Hyderabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the service tax is not payable on the activity of printing advertisement content on PVC material.

The two-member bench headed by Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that the activity of printing advertisement content on PVC material which results in printed PVC flex or PVC board would amount to manufacture.

CESTAT Allows Cenvat credit To Satyam Computer For Service Tax Paid On Medical Insurance Premium Of Employees And Their Family

Case Title: Satyam Computer Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Tax

The Hyderabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), comprised of two members Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) and P. Venkata Subba Rao (Technical Member), has granted Satyam Computer a cenvat credit for service tax paid on insurance premiums for employees and their families.

Charges Of Clandestine Removal Cannot Be Confirmed On The Basis Of Private Records Without Corroborative Evidence: CESTAT

Case Title: Metal Gems Versus C.C.E. & S.T.-Daman

The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that charges of clandestine removal cannot be confirmed on the basis of private records, the authenticity of which was doubted by the manufacturer without any corroborative evidence.

The two-member bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) has observed that the onus to establish clandestine activities, resulting in confirmation of demand is placed heavily on the Revenue and is required to be discharged by the production of sufficient evidence.

Service Tax Demand Can't Be Sustained On Ocean Freight Under RCM: CESTAT

Case Title: M/s Universal Industries Versus Commissioner, CGST- Dehradun

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the service tax demand is not sustainable as the appellant has purchased fertilisers, which are their inputs, at cost, insurance, and freight (CIF) value, which includes the ocean freight element.

The appellant has paid custom duty on CIF value, which includes ocean freight, according to the single bench of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member). Thus, there can be no demand for service tax on the purchase price of goods, even under the reverse charge mechanism.

CESTAT Allows CENVAT Credit On Welding Electrodes And Dissolved Acetylene Gas As Inputs In Cement Manufacturing Process

Case Title: M/s Manikgarh Cement Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur

Citation: Excise Appeal No. 87998 of 2019

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) consisting of Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) has allowed the CENVAT Credit on Welding Electrodes and Dissolved Acetylene Gas (D.A. Gas) as inputs in the Cement Manufacturing Process.

MSO Liable To Pay Service Tax For Providing Cable Operator Services To LCO: CESTAT

Case Title: Commissioner of Central Excise And Central Goods And Service Tax Versus M/s Hathway Sukhamrit Cable & Datacom Pvt. Ltd.

The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Multi System Operators (MSOs) are liable to pay service tax for providing cable operator services to Local Cable Operators (LCOs).

The two-member bench of Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Accountant Member) has observed that owing to the business model of the cable operator industry, the MSO is providing cable operator services to LCOs and not to ultimate consumers, and hence the MSO would be liable to pay service tax only on the amount received from LCOs. The LCOs will be separately liable for discharging service tax on the gross amount received from the ultimate customers for the service provided by the LCO to them.

CESTAT Directs CBIC To Issue Guideline In Respect Of IBC Proceedings Initiated Against Assessee Before CESTAT

Case Title: M/S. Ultratech Nathdwara Cement Limited Versus C.C.-JAMNAGAR (PREV)

The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has been ordered by the Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) to consider issuing guidelines or procedures for handling cases before the CESTAT in which an IBC proceeding has been brought against the assessee's company.

CESTAT Allows Refund Of Unutilised Cenvat credit of Education Cess For Payment Of Output Tax

Case Title: M/s Mahavir Transmission Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax, Dehradun

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed the refund of unutilised cenvat credit of education cess and secondary and higher education cess for payment of output tax.

The bench of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) has relied on the order passed by the Tribunal in the case of Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, CGST and held an assessee is entitled to a refund of unutilized cess under the existing law, lying in credit as on 30/06/2017.

CESTAT Deletes Penalty On Availment of Credit Of Input Services Used In Co-Generation Plant For Generation Of Electricity Sold Outside

Case Title: M/s.Sakthi Sugars Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has deleted the penalty imposed with regard to credit availed in respect of input services used in the co-generation plant for the generation of electricity sold outside.

The bench of Sulekha Beevi C.S. (Judicial Member) has upheld a penalty imposed with regard to an input service tax credit on the services used in the manufacture of ethyl alcohol.

Benefit Of Abatement Notification Can't Be Denied Merely For Mismatch In Quantum Of Purchase: CESTAT

Case Title: Jay Gurudev Construction Co Versus C.C.E. & S.T.-Rajkot

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has ruled that the benefit of abatement notification cannot be denied solely because of a difference in the amount of purchase shown in the profit and loss account and invoices.

Service Tax is Payable On Computer Education Service Under Vocational Training: CESTAT

Case Title: Advance Computer Education Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Ahmedabad

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that service tax is payable on computer education services under vocational training.

The two-member bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) has observed that the computer education service has been excluded from the Vocational Training service by Notification No. 19/2005-ST dated 07.06.2005. The period involved was from 21.06.2006 to 30.11.2009. Therefore, the appellant is not eligible for exemption under vocational training.

Job Of Bottling, Blending And Labelling Indian Made Foreign Liquor Does Not Amount To Taxable Service Under 'Business Auxiliary Service': CESTAT

Case Title: Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Bhubaneswar-I Versus

The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the job of bottling, blending and labelling Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) does not amount to taxable service under "Business Auxiliary Service".

Denying The Customs Duty Exemption Despite The Valid Country Of Origin Certificate Is Not Sustainable: CESTAT

Case Title: M J Gold Pvt. Ltd. Versus Principal Commissioner Of Customs (Import)

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that denying the benefit of customs duty exemption despite the valid country of origin certificate is not sustainable.

Characteristics Of "Consumables" Does Not Attach "Welding Electrodes", MODVAT Credit Can't Be Recovered: CESTAT

Case Title: Manikgarh Cement Versus Commissioner of Central Excise

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that characteristics of "consumables" do not attach to "welding electrodes", and, therefore, the recovery of the Modified Value Added Tax (MODVAT) credit was incorrect.

AAAR

Parathas Different from Plain Chapatti, Attracts 18% GST: Gujarat AAAR

Appellants Name: M/s Vadilal Industries Ltd.

The Gujarat Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR), while upholding the ruling of AAR, has held that 18% GST is applicable on parathas.

The two-member bench of Vivek Ranjan and Milind Torawane has observed that the parathas are different from plain chapatti or roti and cannot be treated as or covered under the category of plain chapatti or roti. The appropriate classification of parathas would be under Chapter Heading 2106.

AAR

HTP Kirloskar Power Sprayer Attracts 18% GST: AAR

Applicant's Name: Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd.

The Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that the 18% GST is payable on HTP Kirloskar Power Sprayer.

The two-member bench of Amit Kumar Mishra and Milind Kavatkar has observed that HTP Kirloskar Power Sprayer's merit classification under HSN 8424 89 90 is covered under Entry No. 325 of Schedule-III of Notification No. 1/20l7-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28.6.2017.

No GST On Subsidised Deduction made From Employees Availing Food In Factory Or Corporate Office: Gujarat AAR

Applicant's Name: M/s. Zydus Lifesciences Ltd.

The Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that GST is not payable on the subsidised deduction made by the applicant from the employees who are availing food in the factory/corporate office.

The two-member bench of Amit Kumar Mishra and Milind Kavatkar has observed that the subsidised deduction made by the applicant from the employees who are availing food in the factory/corporate office would not be considered a supply.

Combined Wire Rope Not Integral Part Of Fishing Vessel, Attracts 18% GST: Gujarat AAR

Applicant's Name: M/s Shakti Marine Electric Corporation

The Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that combined wire rope is not a part of a fishing vessel but it is used to tie the fishing net with the vessel and 18% GST is applicable.

The two-member bench of Amit Kumar Mishra and Milind Kavatkar has observed that goods whenever used as a part of a fishing vessel or vessel attract 5% GST, otherwise, they attract the applicable GST rate of the goods.

Operation And Maintenance Of Municipal Wet Waste Processing Facility Attracts 18% GST: West Bengal AAR

Applicant's Name: Simoco Telecommunications(South Asia) Limited

The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that the 18% GST is payable on the operation and maintenance of municipal wet waste processing facilities.

The two-member bench of Varindra Kaur and Viraj Shyamkarn Tidke observed that the supply of services to be provided to the State Urban Development Agency for the design, build, finance, operation, and transfer of municipal wet waste processing facility based on composting and bio-methanation technology; setting up a semi-automatic material recovery facility for dry waste; and construction of a sanitary landfill along with operation and maintenance under Swachh Bharat Mission/Mission Nirmal Bangla is classifiable under SAC 9994 as "sewage and waste collection, treatment, disposal and other environmental protection services."

5% GST Payable On GTA Services Availed For Transporting Cotton Seed: Punjab AAR

Applicant's Name: Ahuja Industries

The Punjab Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that the 5% GST is chargeable on goods transport agency (GTA) services availed by the applicant for transporting cotton seed (Banaula) provided that the credit of input tax charged on goods and services used in supplying the service has not been taken, else 12% GST is applicable.

The two-member bench of Varindra Kaur and Viraj Shyamkarn Tidke has observed that Cotton Seed (Banaula) is not eligible for exemption from payment of GST on GTA services.

Commercial Vehicle Body Building On Chassis Supplied By The Customer Is A Supply Of Service, Attracts 18% GST: Kerala AAR

Applicant's Name: Puthusserikudy Thankappan Santosh

The Kerala Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that commercial vehicle body building on chassis supplied by the customer is a supply of service.

The two-member bench of S.L. Sreeparvathy and Abraham Renn S. has observed that commercial vehicle body building on chassis supplied by the customer attracts 18% GST.

GST Payable On Value Of Free Diesel Filled By Service Recipient In Vehicle: Uttarakhand AAR

Applicant's Name: Gurjinder Singh Sandhu

The Uttarakhand Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that when the transaction value of the goods transport agency (GTA) service is added to the free value of diesel, the value of free diesel filled by the service recipient in the vehicle(s) provided by the applicant will be subject to GST.

The two-member bench of Anurag Mishra and Rameshwar Meena has observed that the input, i.e., fuel, to run and operate the vehicle, provided free of cost by the recipient of the service, for transportation of goods, shall form part of the value of supply in view of Section 15 of the CGST Act, 2017. The cost of the input has to be paid by the supplier of services but incurred by the recipient, as for the purpose of the levy of GST, the cost of all the inputs, whether provided free of cost or not, has to be included in the value of supply.

Works contract services provided to Malabar Cancer Centre Attracts 18% GST: Kerala AAR

Applicant's Name: Uralungal Labour Contract Co-operative Society Ltd

The Kerala Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that work contract services provided to Malabar Cancer Centre attract 18% GST with effect from 01.01.2022.

The two-member bench of S.L. Sreeparvathy and Abraham Renn S. has observed that Malabar Cancer Centre is a society established by the State Government with 100 per cent participation by way of equity or control, to carry out the function of public health, a function entrusted to a municipality as well as a panchayat under Article 243W and Article 243G, respectively, of the Constitution and accordingly falls within the definition of governmental authority.

"Coal rejects" Attracts 5% GST: Punjab AAR

Applicant's Name: M/s Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.

The Punjab Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that "coal rejects" are to be classified under HSN 2701 and are taxable at 5% GST.

5% GST On Fishing Vessel Marine Engine And Its Spare Parts: Kerala AAR

Applicant's Name: Kerala State Co-operative Federation for Fisheries Development Limited (MATSYAFED)

The Kerala Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has observed that 5% GST is applicable on fishing vessel marine engines and their spare parts.

Affordable Residential Apartments Attracts 1.5% GST: Kerala AAR

Applicant's Name: Crescent Builders

The Kerala Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that affordable residential apartments attract 1.5% GST.

The bench of Sreeparvathi and Abraham Renn has held that a new tax structure for the real estate sector was introduced with effect from 01.04.2019 onwards by the amendment of Notification No. 11/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 by Notification No. 03/2019 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019. The construction services are being rendered by the applicant after 01.04.2019 and hence the rate as notified under the new tax structure is applicable in respect of the construction services rendered by the applicant.

Direct Taxes

Supreme Court

Valuation Of Shares For The Purpose Of Gift Tax Should Take Into Consideration Limitation And Restrictions: Supreme Court

Case Title: Deputy Commissioner of Gift Tax Versus M/s BPL Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 848

The Supreme Court has held that the valuation of shares for the purpose of gift tax must take into consideration the limitations and restrictions.

The division bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice J.K. Maheshwari has observed that the equity shares under the lock-in period were not "quoted shares", for the simple reason that the shares in the lock-in period were not quoted on any recognised stock exchange regularity from time to time. There are no current transactions relating to these shares made in the ordinary course of business. The equity shares, being under the lock-in period, could not be traded and, therefore, remained unquoted on any recognised stock exchange.

Advancement Of General Public Utility Won't Be "Charitable Purpose" For Income Tax Exemption If It Is Done As Business : Supreme Court

Case Title : Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority and connected cases

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 865

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has held that entities created with the object of advancing general public utility cannot seek exemption under the Income Tax Act 1961 under the head "charitable purposes" if they are engaging in any trade, business, commerce or providing any service for any consideration.

Statutory Authorities, Professional Bodies Like ICAI Entitled To Income Tax Exemption If Amounts Charged By Them Are Nominal To Cover Costs : Supreme Court

Case Title : Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority and connected cases

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 865

The Supreme Court has pronounced a significant judgment on the scope of exemption for "charitable purposes" under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961 in relation to statutory authorities and professional bodies.

With effect from 01.04.2009, after the Finance Act 2009, a proviso was added to the section to state : "Provided that the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be a charitable purpose, if it involves the carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business, or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business, for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention, of the income from such activity".

Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court Allows Depreciation Claim To Daikin For Goodwill On Exclusive Business Rights

Case Title: Commissioner Of Income Tax Versus Daikin Shri Ram Aircon Pvt Ltd.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 1026

The Delhi High Court while ruling in favour of the Daikin Shri Ram Aircon Pvt. Ltd. has held that the business rights acquired for valuable consideration constitute an intangible asset within the meaning of Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act and depreciation is allowable.

TDS On NRI Payment: Delhi High Court Rejects Appeal By Revenue- Payment Found As Salary, Not Fees

Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s Boeing India Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 985

The Delhi High Court, while upholding the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), has held that the provision of TDS on NRI payments under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act has no application once the nature of payment is determined as salary and a deduction has been made under Section 192.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has observed that the real employer of the seconded employees continues to be the Indian entity and not the overseas entity.

Department Failed To Pass Re-Assessment Order Within Prescribed Time Limit: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Nagesh Trading Co. Versus Income Tax Officer

The Delhi High Court has quashed the show-cause notice and the reassessment order as the department failed to pass the reassessment order within the prescribed time limit.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora observed that the department could not have issued another notice to the petitioner/assessee under Section 148A(b) dated June 2, 2022, after having issued and served the notice on March 31, 2021, under Section 148 of the unamended Act.

Income Tax On Interest Income From FD, Ownership Need To Te Determined By Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court

Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s Rajdarbar Heritage Venture Limited

The Delhi High Court has held that income tax cannot be levied on the interest income from fixed deposits till the ownership is determined by the arbitral tribunal.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has agreed with the finding of the two Appellate Authorities below that till the final award was passed by the Arbitral Tribunal determining the ownership of the fixed deposits and interest, it could not be said that the interest income had crystallised in the assessee's hands and that it could not be held to be the income of the assessee under Section 5(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Travel Agent's Booking Function Is Not Substantial Business Activity And Not Taxable: Delhi High Court

Case Title: CIT Versus Travelport L.P. USA

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 946

The Delhi High Court has held that the travel agents in India were merely connected to the extent that they could perform a booking function but were not capable of processing the data of all the airlines together in one place.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has held that a booking function is not covered under substantial business activity and, therefore, not taxable.

Bombay High Court

Reassessment Notice Issued Against A Dead Person Would Be Invalid: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Shailesh Shah, Legal Heir of Late Shri Ramniklal Harilal Shah Versus The Income Tax Officer

The Bombay High Court has held that a reassessment notice against a dead person would be invalid unless the legal representatives submit to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer without raising any objection.

The division bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Valmiki Sa Menezes has observed that where the legal representatives do not waive their right to a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, it cannot be said that the notice issued against the dead person is in conformity with the intent and purpose of the Income Tax Act.

Dividends Received By IFFCO From OMIFCO Oman Can't Be Disallowed Under Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: PCIT Versus IFFCO LTD

The Delhi High Court has held that the dividends received by Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative (IFFCO) from Oman India Fertiliser Company S.A.O.C (OMIFCO) Oman cannot be disallowed under the Income Tax Act.

Madras High Court

In The Absence Of A Full And True Disclosure, Reassessment Is Not Barred By Limitation: Madras High Court

Case Title: RKR. Gold P. Ltd Versus ACIT

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 444

The Madras High Court has held that the criminal investigation wing is separate and distinct from the assessment wing and that disclosure made before one wing will not exonerate the assessee from the requirement of making a "full and true disclosure" before the assessing officer in an assessment.

ITAT

Income From Operating And Maintaining IT Park To Be Assessed Under "Income from Business": ITAT

Case Title: DCIT Versus M/s. N.V.Developers Pvt. Ltd.

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the income from operating and maintaining an IT park is to be assessed under the head "Income from Business".

The two-member bench of Vikas Awasthy (Judicial Member) and M. Balaganesh (Accountant Member) has observed that the income from letting out the premises/developing space along with other facilities in an industrial park, SEZ is to be charged to tax under the head "profits and gains of business."

ITAT Allows Deduction To ICICI Bank On Interest Expense On Perpetual Bonds

Case Title: The ACIT Versus ICICI Bank

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has allowed ICICI Bank the deduction on interest expense on perpetual bonds.

The two-member bench of Kavitha Rajagopal (Judicial Member) and Amarjit Singh (Accountant Member) has observed that merely that RBI recognises treating the said debt instruments as additional tier/capital would not change the nature of Innovative Perpetual Debt Instruments, which were of the nature of long-term borrowings and the interest paid was debited to the profit and loss account.

ITAT Disallows Cost of improvement As Assessee Did Not Produce Supporting Bills, Vouchers, Source Of Funds

Case Title: Late Smt. Bhanuben Dhanji Shah Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Range–23(2), Mumbai

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has disallowed the cost of improvement as the assessee failed to produce supporting bills, vouchers, sources of funds, etc.

The two-member bench of Sandeep Singh Karhail (Judicial Member) and Om Prakash Kant (Accountant Member) noted that the claim of the assessee was denied by the lower authorities in the absence of proof with regard to the cost of improvement claimed by the assessee.

Self-Certified Copies Of Documents Are Sufficient For Claiming Exemption Under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act: ITAT

Case Title: Radheyshyam Mandir Trust Versus CIT(Exemption)

The Jaipur Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the self-certified copies of documents are sufficient for the purpose of claiming exemption under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act.

The two-member bench of Dr.S. Seethalakshmi (Judicial Member) and Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai (Accountant Member) have observed that CIT(E) has erroneously passed the order without considering that the assessee has submitted all the necessary documents which were raised in the form of queries.

ITAT Allows 60% Depreciation On ATM machines As Applicable To Computer Software

Case Title: M/s. Financial Software and Systems Private Limited Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The Chennai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has allowed the 60% depreciation on ATM machines as applicable to computer software.

The two-member bench of Sonjoy Sharma (Judicial Member) and G. Manjunatha (Accountant Member) has observed that once the assessee is entitled to 60% of depreciation on ATM machines, the Assessing Officer has to work out the depreciation right from the beginning at 60% to compute WDV.

Extracts of Land Revenue Records, Not Sufficient Evidence To Prove Agricultural Activity: ITAT

Case Title: Noshir Darabshaw Talati Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle–7(1), Mumbai

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has upheld that the assessee is against the addition made on account of short-term capital gains by treating the land as a capital asset.

The two-member bench headed by Pramod Kumar (Vice President) and Sandeep Singh Karhail (Judicial Member) has observed that apart from the purchase and sale deeds of conveyance and 7/12 extracts from land revenue records, no other evidence has been brought on record by the assessee of having cultivated the land or carrying any agricultural activity during the period when the land was held by the assessee or period prior or subsequent to its sale.

TDS Provisions Not Applicable To Commission Paid To Bank: ITAT

Case Title: DCIT Versus M/s. Sareen Sports Industries

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that TDS provisions are not applicable to commissions paid to banks.

The two-member bench of Saktijit Dey (Judicial Member) and Dr B.R.R. Kumar (Accountant Member) has observed that commission paid to partners is not covered under Section 194H of the Income Tax Act as there is no employer and employee or principal-agent relationship between the partners and the firm.

ITAT Allows Deduction On Credit Facilities Given By Co-operative Society To Its Members

Case Title: Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Visnagar Taluka Majoor Sahakari Mandli Limited

Citation: ITA Nos.1529 & 1530/Ahd/2019

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has allowed the deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act on the credit facilities given by the co-operative society to its members as they were directly related to the business while deriving interest.

According to the two-member bench of Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member) and Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), unlike Nationalised Banks, co-operative credit societies/cooperative banks have different setups where deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) is allowable when the interest is derived from credit provided to their members.

Advertisers And Target Audience Are Outside India - Equalisation Levy Not Applicable On Google Ads: ITAT

Case Title: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Prakash Chandra Mishra

The Jaipur Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that an equalisation levy is not payable on advertising payments where advertisers or the target audience are located outside India.

The two-member bench of Dr. S. Seethalakshmi (Judicial Member) and Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai (Accountant Member) have observed that when the intention of the levy is related to the targeted audience and the party paying the online advertisement has no relation in India, the Equalisation Levy is not attracted.

Cess Received By Trust From Milk Societies, Against Sales Made , Not Voluntary; Can't Be " Corpus Donation": ITAT

Case Title: Dudhsagar Research & Development Association versus ACIT(Exemption)

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that the Cess received by a trust from the milk supplying societies, against the sales made by them to the Cooperative Milk Producers Union, cannot qualify as a "Corpus Donation" under the Income Tax Act, 1961, since they are not voluntary in nature.

The Bench of Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member) and Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member) observed that the assessee trust- Dudhsagar Research & Development Association, passed a suo moto resolution to collect donations in the form of Cess from the milk societies, which depended on the quantity of milk fat supplied by them. Holding that the donors had no discretion in computing the quantum of Cess, the Tribunal ruled that merely producing a receipt which states that a certain amount was paid towards the corpus fund of the trust, cannot qualify the contribution as a "Corpus Donation".

IT Exemption To Defence Personnel Invalidated From Service Due To Disability: ITAT Rejects Revenue's Contention

Case Title: Aradhya Ghosh Versus DCIT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that income tax exemption shall be available to Defence Forces personnel who have been invalidated from service on account of bodily disability while in service.

The two-member bench of Chandra Mohan Garg (Judicial Member) has deleted the addition made by the A.O. on account of disability pension not exempt from tax as the assessee had taken premature retirement at his own request.

Payment Made By Assessee To Non-Resident Supplier Amount To "Royalty" And Liable To Deduct TDS: ITAT

Case Title: Prolific Research Pvt. Ltd. Versus DCIT

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the payment made by the assessee to the non-resident supplier would amount to royalty and there is an obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source.

The two-member bench of T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member) and Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member) has observed that the introduction of Explanation 5 in Section 9(1)(iv) of the Income Tax Act has enlarged the scope of the definition of "Royalty".

Vodafone Idea Not Liable To Deduct TDS On Discount Allowed To Distributors On Purchase Of Prepaid SIM Cards And Recharge Vouchers: ITAT

Case Title: M/s. Vodafone Idea Ltd. versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that Vodafone Idea is not liable to Deduct Tax at Source (TDS) on the discount allowed to the distributors on purchase of prepaid SIM Cards and recharge vouchers.

The Bench of Vikas Awasthy (Judicial Member) and M. Balaganesh (Accountant Member) held that since the relationship between the assessee Company and the distributors was only that of a principal to principal and not that of a principal to agent, therefore, the assessee was not obligated to deduct tax at source in terms of Section 194H of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

ITAT Deletes Disallowance u/s 14A Against Toyota As No Exempted Income Was Earned

Case Title: Toyota Tsusho India P. Ltd. Versus The Joint / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The Banglore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act against Toyota as no exempted income was earned.

The two-member bench headed by N.V. Vasudevan (Vice President) and Padmavathi S (Accountant Member) has noted that the AO has made the disallowance on the basis that the investment could potentially earn income, which substantiates the contention of the assessee that in the year under consideration the assessee has not earned any exempt income.

Liquidated Damages Received By Shipping Company, Not Exempt Under 'Tonnage Tax Scheme': ITAT

Case Title: M/s. Dredging Corporation of India Ltd. versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

The Visakhapatnam Bench of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)has ruled that liquidated damages received by a shipping company cannot be included in computation of tonnage tax and therefore, they are not exempt under the 'Tonnage Tax Scheme', as provided under Chapter XIIG of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Income Tax Exemption Eligible On Activities Undertaken For Advancement Of General Public Utility: ITAT

Case Title: M/s Association of Mutual Funds in India Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the income tax exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act is eligible for activities undertaken for the advancement of general public utility.

The two-member bench headed by Pramod Kumar (Vice President) and Rahul Chaudhary (Judicial Member)has observed that the activities of the appellant were directed toward the benefit of investors and potential investors, forming part of the general public and not limited to the benefit of its members. The appellant has also maintained separate accounts in respect of the activities.

Contract For Extended Warranty Of Bentley Cars, Entered Into By Exclusive Dealer With Indian Customers, Does Not Constitute A Dependent Agent PE In India: ITAT

Case Title: ACIT versus M/s. Exclusive Motors Pvt. Ltd.

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that contract for extended warranty of Bentley Cars, entered into by an exclusive dealer with the Indian customers, does not constitute a dependent agent PE in India.

Distribution Fees Paid By Google India To Google Ireland, For Distribution Of AdWords Programme In India, Not 'Royalty' : ITAT

Case Title: M/s. Google India Private Limited versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)

The Bangalore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that the distribution fees paid by Google India to Google Ireland under a Distribution Agreement, under which Google India was appointed as a distributor of AdWords programme to advertisers in India, is not in the nature of 'Royalty' under the India-Ireland DTAA.

ITAT Deletes Fees Related To The Period Of Tax Deduction Prior To June 1, 2015

Case Title: Krishna Pandurang Kobnak versus National Faceless Appeal Centre

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the levy of late fees of INR 40,000 related to the period of the tax deduction prior to 01.06.2015.

Any sum paid to an employee as a bonus or commission to be allowed as a deduction: ITAT Delhi

Case Title: Sh. Karam Singh Malik Versus ITO

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that any sum paid to an employee as a bonus or commission for services rendered has to be allowed as a deduction.

The bench of Saktijit Dey has observed that the reasonableness of the payment or the adequacy of services rendered by the employee is not relevant factors in deciding the allowability of a deduction.

Cash Deposits Made Out Of Withdrawals For The Purpose Of Daughter's Marriage: ITAT Delete Addition

Case Title: Harjeet Kaur Versus Income Tax Officer

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the assessee had explained that deposits were made out of cash withdrawals made earlier for the purpose of her daughter's marriage.

ESOP Cross Charges Paid To Overseas Ultimate Holding Company Is Allowable Expenditure: ITAT Allows Deduction To HP

Case Title: M/s. Hewlett Packard (India) Software Operation Pvt. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

The Bangalore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), while ruling in favour of the HP, held that employee stock option plan (ESOP) cross charges paid to overseas ultimate holding companies are an allowable expenditure.