Tax
Change Of Opinion Does Not Constitute Justification To Believe Income Chargeable To Tax Has Escaped Assessment: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that a change of opinion does not constitute justification and/or reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.The bench of Justice K. R. Shriram and Justice Neela Gokhale has observed that once a query is raised during the assessment proceedings and the assessee has replied to it, it follows that the query raised was a subject...
CESTAT Quashes Service Tax, Interest And Penalty On Virgin Atlantic Airways On Passenger Service Fee, Airport Taxes
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has quashed the service tax, interest, and penalty on Virgin Atlantic Airlines passenger service fees and airport taxes.The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has remanded the matter to the Commissioner for verification of whether the appellant had collected...
No Escapement Of Income By Singaporean Entity On Repatriating Rs.203.56 Cr. Arising From Redemption Of NCDs: ITAT
The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the Singaporean Entity has not escaped the income on repatriating Rs.203.56 Cr. arising from redemption of non-convertible debentures (NCDs).The bench of Astha Chandra (Judicial Member) and B. R. R. Kumar (Accountant Member) has observed that the Assessing Office has not examined the relevant records before them wherein...
Assessee Attempted To Drag Matter Knowing Well That Assessment Will Be Time Barred: Calcutta High Court Upholds Reassessment
The Calcutta High Court has held that the assessee had repeatedly sought adjournments, which would show that the assessee attempted to drag the matter along, knowing well that the assessment would be time-barred.The bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya have observed that the provision of Section 148A of the Act has been scrupulously followed by the...
Fees Received For Sub-Licensing Sports Broadcasting Rights Attributable To 'Live Feed', Not Taxable As Royalty: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that fees received by assessees for sub-licensing sports broadcasting rights attributable to 'live feed' is not taxable as royalty.The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Girish Kathpalia has observed that once the Court came to the conclusion that a live telecast would not fall within the ambit of the expression “work”, it would be wholly erroneous...
UPGST | Invoice Contains Vehicle Details, Error In Not Filling Part-B Of E-Way Bill Technical: Allahabad High Court Quashes Penalty Order
The Allahabad High Court has held that if the invoice accompanying the goods contains all the details of the vehicle then not filing of Part-B of the e-way bill is a technical error without any intention to evade tax. The court quashed the penalty order under Section 129(3) of the UP Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.Petitioner approached the High Court against the order under Section 129(3) of...
Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Acted In Undue Haste In Disposing Of Revision Applications: Jharkhand High Court
The Jharkhand High Court has held that the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes has acted in undue haste in disposing of the revision applications. It is trite law that if an authority acts in undue haste, malice in law is to be presumed, and his action is deemed to be mala fide.The bench of Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Justice Deepak Roshan has observed that the...
Assessee To Approach Tribunal On Failure Of GST Dept. To Follow CESTAT's Direction, Writ Petition Not Maintainable: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court has held that the writ petition is not maintainable as the assessee has to approach the tribunal on the failure of the GST department to follow the direction of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).The bench of Acting Chief Justice Dr. B.R. Sarangi and Justice Murahari Sri Raman has observed that it is incumbent upon the authority to give...
CGST Preventive Wing And DGGI Wing To Forward All Investigation And Inter-Related Transaction To State Authorities: Jharkhand High Court
The Jharkhand High Court has opined that the Preventive Wing of the CGST and DGGI Wing of the CGST shall forward all their investigation carried out as against the petitioner and inter-related transactions to the State Authorities, who shall continue with the proceedings from the same stage.The bench of Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Justice Deepak Roshan has stated that “we failed...
Assessment Order Passed Beyond Sec 144C(4) Is Time Barred If Objections To Draft Order Were Filed After Expiry Of Limitation As Per Sec 144C(2): Delhi ITAT
Noticing that the draft assessment order was passed on Mar 4, 2022 and the assessee filed objection before the DRP on Apr 6, 2022 which was beyond the due date provided for filing objection, the Delhi ITAT held the assessment order to be time-barred being passed beyond Section 144C(4) of Income tax Act, 1961 time-limit. The ITAT Coram comprising of Challa Nagendra Prasad (Judicial Member) and...
Taxpayer Entitled To Hearing On Merits If Appeals Were Dismissed By HC For Delay In Filing Paper-Book: Supreme Court
While setting aside the Rajasthan High Court orders, the Supreme Court restored the assessee's appeals by condoning the delay in filing the paper-book before High Court and observed that the assessee is entitled to have his appeals heard on merits.The Division Bench comprising of Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Aravind Kumar, observed that “As Appeal No. 817 of 2008 stood dismissed...
Taxpayer Staying In India For Less Than 182 Days As Per Exp 1(A) To Sec 6(1) Of I-T Act, Entitles To 'Non-Resident' Status: Mumbai ITAT
While opining that even if the taxpayer has left India for the purpose of business or profession, the same shall be considered for purpose of employment outside India under Explanation 1(a) to Section 6(1) of Income tax Act, 1961, the Mumbai ITAT held that assessee has rightly claimed to be a 'non-resident' as he stayed in India only for a period of 176 days during the year which entitles him...