Judgements and Orders, Supreme Court and High courts of India

The appellant, being aggrieved by the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai, (for short ‘Tribunal’) in Appeal No.A/75-78/WZB/06/C-II/EB dated 13.01.2006, is before us in this appeal filed u

Challenge in this appeal, by the revenue, under Section 130E(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short “the Act”) is to the order dated 10th December 2004 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, (for short “the Tribunal”) where

These appeals filed by the Revenue under Section 35- L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short “the Act”) are directed against the order and judgment dated 21st August 2002 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, (f

These civil appeals under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short “the Act) are directed against the order dated 21st January 2002 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal), as it th

This civil appeal under Section 130E of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short “the Act”) is directed against order dated 2nd February 2005, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”), whereby the appeal pre

Penalty on customs officers - . The order passed by , Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), to the extent he decided not to impose any penalty on the petitioners, could not have been set aside and the matter could not have been remanded back to the

Levy of penalty against the persons who were not to the parties to the case – held that - The petitioners were not parties before the Tribunal when the order of remand was passed by the Tribunal. They were neither made parties by the exporters nor by

Penalty u/s 271(1)(C) – concealment of income – held that - there was a difference of opinion and there were three decisions in favour of the assessee which was ultimately decided against the assessee only after the return was filed by him and conseq

In this case, the ITAT gave an order favouring the I-T departments decision to levy tax on $1 million (about Rs 4.5 crore) paid by an Indian company to a Chinese firm for services rendered in China.

The only issue in assessee's appeal is against the adjustment of Rs.21,95,034/- made by the Transfer Pricing Officer in respect of transaction with associated enterprises which has been partly confirmed by Ld. CIT(A). The company is engaged in the ma