|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 1843 Records
-
2019 (11) TMI 1826
Dissolution of the Government of Meghalaya Department of Education - respondent CMJ University stood dissolved in exercise of power under Section 42(2) of the CMJ University Act of 2009 - HELD THAT:- The Court was of the considered view that there was non-compliance with or breach of the fundamental procedural requirements as provided under Section 48 of the CMJ University Act of 2009 as well as that of the principles of natural justice and also the concept of the obligation of the administrative authorities to act fairly in issuing the show cause notices and the order of dissolution - in fact there was no depiction of the case as projected by the respondents in the writ petition.
When the learned Single Judge provided that ‘for the foregoing discussions’, it is understood that the discussion would include the case projected by one party and the contrary case projected by the other party and upon giving a consideration to both the projections, a decision and adjudication be arrived thereon. As already pointed out that the case projected by the respondents in the writ petition i.e., the authorities under the State of Meghalaya were neither stated nor projected and hence it cannot be a case where because of foregoing discussions the Court arrived at a particular conclusion.
Both the learned senior counsel for the parties arrived at an agreement that the judgment dated 16.07.2015 of the learned Single Judge be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the learned Single Judge for a fresh adjudication of the dispute.
The matter stood remanded back to the learned Single Judge for a fresh adjudication, the interest of justice would require that the stay order dated 04.09.2017 of the Supreme Court should continue till the matter is in sesin of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of the Meghalaya.
Appeal disposed off.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1825
Allowability of interest on excess dividend distribution tax paid - appreciation of provisions of Section 244A read with Section 115-O - substantial question of law - HELD THAT:- Appeal u/s 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is admitted on the following substantial questions of law only:-
1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal exercised its jurisdiction properly in allowing interest on excess dividend distribution tax paid by the assessee in the assessment year 2009-2010 and quashing the proceeding under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal appreciated the provisions of Section 244A read with Section 115-O of the said Act correctly?
As the respondent is represented by learned counsel, issuance and service of notice of appeal are dispensed with. Let informal paper books be filed by the appellant’s advocate-on-record by 2nd December, 2019, serving a copy thereof on the advocate-on-record for the respondent at least seven days before the date of hearing of this appeal. List this appeal for hearing on 16th December, 2019.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1824
Appellant trust was a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - whether the purchase of flats for the purpose of providing accommodation to nurses employed by the Appellant trust’s hospital qualifies as a ‘purchase of services for a commercial purpose’? - whether the Appellant is excluded from the definition of ‘consumer’ under Section 2(1)(d) of the 1986 Act? - HELD THAT:- The purchase of flats by the Appellant for the purpose of providing hostel facilities to the hospital nurses does not qualify as meant for a ‘commercial purpose’. Though the term ‘commercial purpose’ as referred to under Section 2(1)(d) has nowhere been defined under the provisions of the 1986 Act, this Court has expounded upon it based on its lateral dictionary meaning in various decisions.
With regard to goods and services availed of by employers for the benefit of their employees, it is particularly important to note that we live in a socialist economy, wherein the ethos dictates that employers are obligated to make provisions for the welfare of their employees. No doubt, welfare measures undertaken by employers may increase workers’ health and efficiency, and therefore improve the employing entity’s overall productivity. However this is a duty to be shared by all employer organisations and not merely those looking to increase their productivity/profits. This obligation exists irrespective of how much profit or turnover the organization generates in a year, though the degree to which it extends may differ depending upon the financial capacity of the employer - if in all such cases the third party service-provider disclaims liability before consumer forums on the ground that the hirer of the service is engaged in trade and commerce, it will open a Pandora’s box wherein the employer as well as the employees will not have any remedy. This would defeat the object of providing a speedy remedy to consumers, as outlined in the provisions of the 1986 Act. Further, setting such a precedent may discourage employers from undertaking to provide any facilities for their employees. Hence, it is necessary to clarify that the provision of such services would not usually be included in the definition of ‘commercial purpose.’
There is no direct nexus between the purchase of flats by the Appellant trust and its profit generating activities. The flats were not occupied for undertaking any medical/diagnostic facilities within the hospital but for accommodating the nurses employed by the hospital. Moreover, the flats were being provided to the nurses without any rent. It is not the Respondents’ case that the Appellant was generating any surplus from occupying the flats or engaging in buying and selling of flats - It may be the case that provision of comfortable hostel facilities to the nurses, generates a feeling of gratitude and loyalty towards their employer and improves their overall efficiency, which indirectly results in the hospital gaining more repute and therefore generating more income. However, this is a matter of conjecture and there is no direct causal chain which can be drawn between provision of accommodation to hospital employees and increase in the Appellant’s profits.
The Appellant trust is a ‘consumer’ under Section 2(1)(d) of the 1986 Act for the present transaction under consideration - it is considered appropriate to remand the matter to the National Commission for consideration in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed and restored before the National Commission, and the impugned judgment is set aside.
Appeal allowed by way of remand.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1823
Revision u/s 263 by CIT - unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 - swapping of shares - second round of revision proceedings - as per CIT AO had not verified genuineness of the investments made in the assessee’s shares as well as its purchases of unquoted shares in various private limited companies alongwith loans and advances - HELD THAT:- We find that the assessee as well as all the six parties had swapped their shares than passing any cash credits in the respective accounts of all the six parties. They had not exchanged any consideration since the parties transferred their shareholdings to each other. This clinching fact has nowhere been rebutted at the Revenue’s behest.
CIT-DR’s strongly contended that this issue cannot be raised in the instant second round of revision proceedings. We find no force in the Revenue’s instant plea since the assessee had objected to the CIT’s former revision proceedings qua the instant legal aspect as it is evident from a perusal of said order. The question as to whether such a swapping of shares invites unexplained cash credits addition u/s. 68 or not stands answered in assessee’s favour in ITO Ward-5(3) Kolkata vs. M/s Bhagwat Marcom Pvt. Ltd [2019 (8) TMI 649 - ITAT KOLKATA] wherein as held when the cash did not pass at any stage and since the respective parties did not receive cash nor did pay any cash, there was no real credit of cash in the cash book and the question of inclusion of the amount of the entry as unexplained cash credit could not arise.
We are of the view that even if the latter assessment accepting assessee’s share applications / premium is held erroneous the same does not cause any prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue therefore. Hon'ble apex court’s landmark decision in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] settled the law long back that the CIT must satisfy himself that the assessment forming the subject-matter of revision simultaneously satisfies both limbs of erroneous as well as causing prejudice to interest of the revenue. We therefore accept assessee’s arguments and restore the Assessing Officer’s latter assessment order - Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1822
Levy of late fee u/s 234E - scope of amendment w.e.f 01/06/2015 - Levy for respective assessment years prior to 01.06.2015 - HELD THAT:- The issue under consideration pertaining to levy of late fee after the amendment w.e.f 01/06/2015 and this issue has been decided against the assessee vide order in Station Headquarters Jodhpur & Others Vs. ACIT & Others [2019 (9) TMI 607 - ITAT JODHPUR] wherein as held that the amendment [clause (c)] was inserted u/s. 200A of the Act which has been given effect from 01.06.2015 is prospective in nature, and no computation of late fee for the demand or the intimation for the late fee u/s. 234E could be made for the TDS deducted for the respective assessment years prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, the intimation u/s. 200A of the Act by the AO, TDS for payment of late fee u/s. 234E of the Act for the respective assessment years prior to 01.06.2015 is without any authority of law. Appeals of the assessee are dismissed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1821
Suit for declaration of owner in possession of the suit property - HELD THAT:- Perusal of the order under revision reflects that the aforestated aspect with regard to the jurisdiction of the trial Court was not specifically raised. However, it is well settled that challenge to a Lok Adalat award can only be on limited grounds and such a challenge would lie only before the High Court by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution [see STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. VERSUS JALOUR SINGH & ORS. [2008 (1) TMI 960 - SUPREME COURT] and BHARGAVI CONSTRUCTIONS & ANR. VERSUS KOTHAKAPU MUTHYAM REDDY & ORS. [2017 (9) TMI 1731 - SUPREME COURT]. As lack of jurisdiction would go to the root of the matter, the trial Court ought to have been mindful of this aspect when an application was filed before it seeking rejection of the plaint. The order passed by the trial Court holding to the contrary, unmindful of the aforestated legal position, therefore cannot be countenanced.
The order passed by the trial Court holding to the contrary, unmindful of the aforestated legal position, therefore cannot be countenanced - the civil revision is allowed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1820
Determination of the value of the property for payment of stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - main contention advanced is that the documents on which the reliance was placed by the Collector were never supplied to the respondent - HELD THAT:- As the matter is being remanded by the learned Single Judge and as this appeal is dismissed, without going into the details of the judgments, but, suffice it to say that the circle rates are not the only factors to be kept in mind by the Collector. The circle rate can be one of the factors to be kept in mind by the Collector for determination of the value under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, especially, when the person who has approached for registration of the sale deed is disputing the valuation pointed out by the registering authority. In such an eventuality, detailed procedure ought to have been followed by the Collector as per Section 47-A(2) of the Act, 1899 keeping in mind the aforesaid aspects of the matter as well as the principles propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in RAMESH CHAND BANSAL & ORS. VERSUS DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/COLLECTOR GHAZIABAD & ORS. [1999 (5) TMI 604 - SUPREME COURT] and RAVINDER NARAIN AND ANR. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2003 (2) TMI 515 - SUPREME COURT] determination of the value of the property. The mechanical approach of the Collector only to follow the circle rate is hereby deprecated.
It was held in the case of Ramesh Chand Bansal & Ors. vs. District Magistrate/Collector that the impugned circular and the notice to be valid. Notice has already been issued to the appellants and they have an opportunity to contest the valuation prima facie fixed under the said circular and to prove to the contrary in the proceedings before the Collector.
It was held in the case of Ravinder Narain & Anr. vs. UOI that on the basis of the instances pressed into service by the acquiring authority and the land owner-appellants, the average can be fixed @ ₹ 61.50/- for both the notifications in question by adopting the extent of plotted area as done by the High Court which appears to be appropriate in the circumstances of the case. Therefore, the rate per sq. yard can be fixed @Rs.40/-. Though it was contended that there was marked variation in price relating to the instances of sale, vis--vis second notification, it does not appear, on the basis of evidence on record, that the fluctuation was of very high magnitude.
This Letters Patent Appeal is hereby dismissed as there are no reason to interfere with the judgment and order dated 14th March, 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge since no error was committed by the learned Single Judge in appreciating the aforesaid facts of the matter.
The money deposited by the respondent (original petitioner) with this Court as per the order dated 12th April, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge shall remain deposited with the Registrar General of this Court and will be invested in a nationalised bank, since the matter is being remanded to the Collector for fresh determination of the valuation, and if any additional stamp duty is required to be paid by this respondent (original petitioner), the amount of Rs. 1,06,87,791/- will be adjusted towards the same. If more amount is to be deposited by the original petitioner, the aforesaid amount will be adjusted. If lesser amount is to be paid by the original petitioner, rest of the amount will be returned to the original petitioner.
Appeal dismissed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1819
Admission of section 9 application - pre-existing disputes or not - it is shown that the amount is payable to the ‘Corporate Debtor’ and there are claims and counter claims, which has not been adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority - HELD THAT:- Such ground cannot be accepted as the disputed question relating to claims and counter claims cannot be determined by Adjudicating Authority in an application under Section 9 of the I&B Code. In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/S. INNOVENTIVE INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS ICICI BANK & ANR. [2017 (9) TMI 58 - SUPREME COURT], even if amount is disputed or payable and is found to be more than Rs.1,00,000/-, the application under Section 9 is to be admitted. In the present case, there is no pre-existing dispute pending before the parties.
Therefore, the Appellant cannot take any advantage relating to disputed bills, the question of joint inspection of contract etc. does not arise. In absence of any merit, the Appeal is dismissed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1818
Jural relationship between a chit fund entity and the subscribers, created by a chitty agreement - debt in prasenti or a promise to discharge a contractual obligation? - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the provisions of Chapter V of the 1982 Act makes it clear that if a prized subscriber defaults in making payment of an installment, the chit foreman has the right to recover the amount covering all future subscriptions from the defaulting subscriber as a consolidated amount - Section 32 of the 1982 Act empowers the foreman to recover the consolidated payment of all future subscriptions forthwith in the case of a default.
The object is to empower the foreman to recover the amount in a lump sum from a defaulting subscriber, so as to secure the interest of the other subscribers, and ensure smooth functioning of the Chit Fund. Such a provision would not amount to a penalty.
The relationship between the foreman and the subscribers in a chit fund transaction is of such a nature that there is a necessity and justification for making stringent provisions to safeguard the interest of the other subscribers, and the foreman. If a prized subscriber defaults in payment of his subscriptions, the foreman will be obliged to obtain the equivalent amount from other sources, to meet the obligations for payment of the chit amount to the other members, who prize the chit on subsequent draws. For raising such an amount, the foreman may be required to pay high rates of interest - The stipulation of empowering the foreman to recover the entire balance amount in a lump sum, in the event of default being committed by a prized subscriber, is to ensure punctual payment by each of the individual subscribers of the chit fund.
The relationship between a chit subscriber and the chit foreman is a contractual obligation, which creates a debt on the day of subscription. On default taking place, the foreman is entitled to recover the consolidated amount of future subscriptions from the defaulting subscriber in a lump sum.
The impugned judgment passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in AFA No. 85 of 1994 is set aside - Appeal allowed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1817
TP adjustment on account of the interest receivables - receivables in relation to ITES services or not? - HELD THAT:- From the perusal of the order passed in the Assessment Year 2014-15, it is seen that the issue involved in the present assessment is identical. Besides, the contentions of the Ld. DR does not sustain as there is no receivables in relation to ITES services as per the records.
Thus, we set aside the finding of the DRP which was complied by the Assessing Officer and delete the adjustment on account of the interest receivables Therefore, Ground of assessee is allowed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1816
Seeking restoration of petition which was dismissed in non compliance of peremptory order - applicant submits that due to inadvertent, default could not be cured within stipulated time as has been granted by this Court - HELD THAT:- Considered the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in RAFIQ AND ANOTHER VERSUS MUNSHILAL AND ANOTHER [1981 (4) TMI 255 - SUPREME COURT] wherein, it is categorically held that for the fault of counsel, a party should not be made to suffer. Therefore, this court deems it fit to allow the MCC.
The Misc. Civil Case is allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.1000/- to be deposited in the Legal Aid Services within seven working days.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1815
Warrants issued by the Magistrate against the petitioner - whether Magistrate had reason or occasion to exercise his discretion to decide whether the petitioner was evading his arrest or not? - authorisation of police custody - HELD THAT:- The provisions of Section 41 of the Cr.P.C. are quite clear that unless a cognizable offence is committed by a person in the presence of such police officer, police officer cannot arrest an accused only on the basis of his whims that he suspects the said person to have committed some offence. If such person has committed some cognizable offence, which is punishable for imprisonment, then before arresting the person, the police officer has to satisfy himself that the arrest of such person is necessary; for the purposes delineated in the Section itself.
This court finds reliance of the counsel for the petitioner on ARNESH KUMAR VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR & ANR [2014 (7) TMI 1143 - SUPREME COURT], befitting in the facts of the case. In that judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has unequivocally held that before arresting the accused, alleged to have committed a cognizable and non-bailable offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, the police officer has to record reasons qua his satisfaction that the arrest of the said person is necessary for the purpose mentioned in the Section. As a necessary corollary, this would mean that if the conditions mentioned in these provisions are not complied with by the investigating officer, the arrest of the petitioner, from very inception, may be rendered invalid, inviting the adverse legal consequences, even for the concerned police officer.
This court also finds that more often then not, the police use the power of the Magistrate to issue warrant of arrest against an accused, only as a tool to avoid its responsibility to carry out the investigation to the logical end; and only for the purpose of getting such an accused declared as proclaimed offender. This methodology is normally adopted by the police just to get rid of the responsibility of putting a report before the Magistrate qua investigation, which otherwise is a mandate of law cast upon the police, or even to avoid arresting an accused in inconvenient cases or inconvenient circumstances. As a result, lots of persons are got declared as proclaimed offenders; and forgotten altogether by the police thereafter - this court is also of the view that before the Magistrate/court has taken cognizance of any offence, the power of issuance of warrants of arrest under any provision of Cr.P.C, on an application of a police officer, cannot be invoked by the Magistrate as a routine matter.
Undisputedly, the petitioner has not been arrested by the police despite having power to arrest him without warrant. Therefore, there is nothing on record of the present petition; showing whether the investigating officer was ever satisfied qua the requirement of the petitioner to be arrested or not. This court is presented with only an application moved by the police officer before the Magistrate; seeking issuance of warrant against the petitioner. The said application is silent qua any reason, which requires assistance from the court for arresting the petitioner - By perusing the warrants issued by the Magistrate also, it is quite clear that the Magistrate has issued the warrant only to enlarge the effort of the police qua its investigation; as the reason for issuing warrant of arrest. The only other reason mentioned is that there is no stay of arrest qua the petitioner by any other court. Although the Magistrate may not be required to record any detailed reasons as such for issuing warrants, however, this court is of the view that none of these reasons given in this case is germane to the provisions under which the Magistrate is required to exercise his powers to issue warrants of arrest. There is nothing, either in the order passed by the Magistrate, from which it can be discernible that the Magistrate had some reasons or material to justify the discretion exercised by him.
This court finds that impugned warrants issued by the Magistrate cannot be sustained. Hence, the present petition is partly allowed. The impugned warrants of arrest and consequent orders impugned in the present petition are quashed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1814
Abuse of dominant position by an enterprise - HELD THAT:- Nothing has been placed on record to establish that in the relevant market i.e. the segment of passenger cars, BMW India enjoyed a dominant position. The material available in public domain which has been considered by the CCI unmistakably demonstrates that BMW India had insignificant presence in the relevant market and BMW passenger cars did not occupy a significant market share. Merely because, the act of refusal on the part of OP-1 to renew dealership of Informant beyond 31st December, 2017 may have caused pecuniary loss to the Informant does not raise any competition concern, even if, the consequence of such termination of dealership has proved advantageous to the dealers of OP-1 in neighbouring states of Gujarat to sell BMW cars to customers hailing from Gujarat. As regards, fiscal loss to the State of Gujarat in the form of Taxes leviable on sale of cars suffice it to say that apart from the Informant having no locus to raise such issue the revenue resources available to the State would depend on the profitability of business and it lies within the domain of the manufacturer, whether setting up of dealership in a particular State would promote its business and generate profit.
There are no ground to interfere with the well reasoned order impugned in this appeal, we take note of the fact that the Informant is said to have obtained financing facilities from OP-2 for running its business and default of debt advanced by OP-2 to the Informant is stated to be staggering amount exceeding Rs.54 Crores, in respect whereof OP-2 is stated to have filed application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 being C.P.(IB)No.161/2017 pending consideration before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench.
There are no merit in this appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1813
Disqualification of Petitioner to hold the Office of the Directorship of a Company under Section 164 (2) (a) of the Companies Act 2013 - HELD THAT:- As the Petitioner in this case is similarly placed to the Petitioners in W.P. No. 25455 of 2017 [2018 (8) TMI 436 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] relating to the same impugned lists published in the website by the Respondents, he is entitled to identical relief that has been granted to them.
Petition allowed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1812
Deduction u/s 80IC - claim denied as work of printing was not carried out at the premises of the assessee in the notified area for the purpose of Section 80IC - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2019 (7) TMI 535 - ITAT DELHI] Once the deduction u/s 80IC of the Act is allowed in the ‘initial assessment year’ i.e. in the AY 2010-11 after due verification of the prescribed conditions and there is no change in the facts, then the deduction cannot be disallowed in subsequent years on the ground of non-fulfillment of conditions laid down in section 80-IC of the Act. This view has been fortified by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Communication Internet Servicse Ltd. [2011 (8) TMI 633 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee
TDS u/s 194H - Disallowance of Trade discount u/s 40(a)(ia) - not deducting the tax at source on the commission payment made under the guise of “Trade Discount” - ‘trade discount’ OR ‘commission' - HELD THAT:- In the case of Skol Breweries [2013 (10) TMI 416 - ITAT MUMBAI] as held that when a purchase / sales is made at discounted price, it is called discount but when an incentive is given for undertaking task / job/ services provided or on sale of goods by one person on behalf of other, then it is commission. Since the benefit given by the assessee to M/s S. Chand Co. Ltd. was in the nature of ‘trade discount’ and not ‘commission’, therefore, the assessee was not required to deduct income tax at source u/s. 194H of the Act, thus, no disallowance can be made u/s. 40(a)(ia) - Decided in favour of the assessee.
Disallowance for delay in deposit of Employees Contribution to PF - due date of filing of return of income - HELD THAT:- The employees contribution to EPF was deposited well before the due date of filing of return of income. The assessee has explained the circumstances in which such delay has been occurred. Thus, relying on the judgment of CIT vs. Vinay Cement Ltd. [2007 (3) TMI 346 - SC ORDER] and CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. [2009 (12) TMI 38 - DELHI HIGH COURT] the addition was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A), which does not need any interference on our part, therefore, we uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute and reject the ground raised by the Revenue.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1811
Credit for advance tax and TDS credit of both the companies prior to the amalgamation - amalgamation between assessee company and its wholly owned subsidiary - A.O. had considered the income arising to the amalgamated company, but while granting credit of TDS and Advance Tax, he did not allow the same in toto - CIT(A) also dismissed the same holding that the assessee did not submit any TDS Certificate or Advance Tax payment details before the AO/CIT(A) - HELD THAT:- We agree with the contention of the assessee that when the amalgamated results or income of the amalgamating company has been taken into consideration, then the credit for advance tax paid and TDS made by amalgamating company should be given to amalgamated company, i.e. the assessee before us.
We deem it fit and proper to remand the issue to the file of A.O. with a direction to verify the claim of TDS credit and advance tax paid by amalgamating company and allow the same to the assessee in accordance with law. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1810
TP Adjustment - years covered under APA - comparable analysis - Applicability of roll Back provisions - AR submitted that assessee has entered into advanced pricing agreement [APA] for assessment years 2014-15 to 2018-19 covering all international transactions undertaken by assessee during the said period and that years under consideration are not covered by said APA - AR also submitted that FAR analysis of trading segment for year under consideration is identical to years covered under APA and thus prayed for rollback same margin to be applied to the year under consideration as agreed in APA - HELD THAT:- Roll Back provisions are dealt with as per Rule 10MA of Income tax Rules 1962. We have perused APA dated 31/07/2018 for assessment years 2014-15 to 2018-19, between assessee and CBDT in respect of AE's most particularly mentioned in Appendix 1(a). In APA signed by assessee, there is no roll back provision for years under consideration. However, circumstances which provides for applying the rule, needs to be analysed. The transaction must be identical in terms of functions, risks assumed regarding international transaction must be same.
Having regards to above discussion, we find it necessary to set aside the issue to Ld. TPO/AO to verify FAR of assessment years for which APA was entered and assessment years under consideration. Ld. AO/TPO shall compare international transaction for years under consideration and terms of APA and to compute ALP of transaction in accordance with law. Under such circumstances, additional ground raised by assessee becomes academic and therefore, we are not adjudicating the same. Appeals allowed for statistical purposes.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1809
Monetary limit to appeal before the Tribunal - Dismissal of appeal on low tax effect - HELD THAT:- CBDT vide Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019, has enhanced the monetary limit for filing of appeals by the Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal from Rs.20 lakhs to Rs.50 lakhs. The said circular also makes reference to the earlier Circular No. 3/2018, dated 11.7.2018 and, especially states that as a step towards further management of litigation, the Board has decided to enhance the monetary limit for filing of the appeals. This circular is not in supersession of the earlier circular but only amends the monetary limits as well as gives clarification with regard to paragraph 5 of the earlier circular. This, inter alia, means that all the other conditions mentioned in the earlier Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 11.7.2018 will apply mutatis mutandis including that, it will apply to all the pending appeals.
CBDT vide Circular dated 20th August, 2019 (F. No. 279/19-93/2018-ITJ), has clarified that it will apply to all pending appeals. Thus, in view of the aforesaid circular, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as non-maintainable as the tax effect involved in the appeal is below Rs.50 lakhs. However, it is made clear that the Department is at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application for recalling of the order, if the tax effect is found to be more than the prescribed limit of Rs.50,00,000/- or any of the conditions etc., as available in the amendment carried out in para 10 of Circular No. 3/2018, dated 20.08.2018, is made out. Revenue appeal dismissed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1808
Maintainability of appeal - monetary limit involved - Imposition of oil cess and National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD), education cess(EC), secondary and higher secondary education cess(SHE) - “Condensate” which emerges out during the processing of natural gas in their gas plant - HELD THAT:- The Civil Appeals are dismissed on the ground of low tax effect.
-
2019 (11) TMI 1807
Offence of cheating - Applicability of Section 220 of the Cr.P.C. - case of inducement, allurement and cheating of a large number of investors/ depositors in a criminal conspiracy - HELD THAT:- Issue notice returnable within four weeks - In the meanwhile, there will be stay of operation of the order impugned.
The Registry is directed to supply relevant papers to the amicus curaie.
........
|
9911796707
