Ca final: may15: dt cases: summary: 26 pages

Final 1413 views 4 replies

Guest

Please find the summary of cases of CA Final Direct tax Laws relevant for May 2015.

Source of Compilation : Latest ICAI Select Cases book.

This summary is helpful for students just like me : average students, who do not have photographic memory, who find impossible to learn Full Case name, who have shortage of time, who are too lazy to go through 120 pages of Select Cases book of ICAI.

Total Pages : 26

Please simply ignore cases given in RTP.

Attached File : 149116 1408326 casesmay2015dt.doc downloaded: 615 times

Replies (4)

Guest

For an average student, it is an impossible task to remember the full case name.

Real problem is to remember whether the authority involved is CIT or ACIT or ITO. So, I have deleted them from the case name.

Now, remember the name of assessee and quote " Ref : Assessee name "

Your quality of answer will improve.

It is still an easy job than to learn full case name.

Guest

Another frustrating thing is to remember whether the High Court is of Maharashtra or Delhi or Allahabad or Punjab and Haryana and list goes on.

I tried and tried to learn but on the last day, everything just get messed up.

There are 10+ states invoved in this compilation.

So, I deleted the state names too. It just says, " The Court held that"

But I have mentioned the Supreme Court in the compilation.

There are 10-15 Supreme court judgements.

As there is only one supreme court, rote learning is very easy for these cases.

Majority of marks are for provision/logic/issue involved. So give more importance to the issue involved.

Guest

Some Tips:

If the question on case studies come for minimum 5 marks

Format

1. Citation

2. Facts of the case

3. Decision of the Honorable Tribunal / Court

4. Conclusion

Unfortunately, the pattern has changed. Now the questions on case studies come for 4 marks only.

Here is the format as per recent suggested answers :

Answer (a) No, the CESTAT was not justified in dismissing the appeal in the given case. The facts of the given case are similar to B. E. Office Automation Products Ltd. v. CCEx. 2014 (300) ELT 486 (P &H) decided by High Court wherein it was held that mere payment of redemption fine in no way shrinks the right of the appellant to challenge not only confiscation but also imposition of redemption fine and final penalty. Further, making of payment of redemption fine by the importer for release of goods at the earliest in order to save cost of detention and demurrage as also to avoid further deterioration in value and quality of goods, cannot be said to be bad or improper.

Each case study will be for 4 marks.

Format : Provision

Analysis with Case name

Conclusion