I-T - Power of revision cannot be exercised where CIT records no reasons for disagreeing with the findings recorded by AO: ITAT

I-T - U/s 263, PCIT can set aside original assessment that has been completed without proper enquiries: ITAT

I-T - Once initial documents are admitted by CIT(A) and remand report has been called upon from AO, then same cannot be rejected without any cogent reasons and conducting necessary enquiries : ITAT

2022-TIOL-545-ITAT-BANG

Charoen Pokphand Seeds India Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.CIT

Whether u/s 263, PCIT can set aside original assessment that has been completed without proper enquiries - YES: ITAT

2022-TIOL-544-ITAT-DEL

Evon Technologies Pvt Ltd Vs ITO

Whether power of revision can be exercised only once the PCIT has done some enquiry before concluding that original assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue's interests - YES: ITAT

Whether power of revision can be exercised where CIT records no reasons for disagreeing with the findings recorded by the AO - NO: ITAT

- Assessee's appeal allowed: DELHI ITAT

2022-TIOL-543-ITAT-AHM

Devendersingh Sajubhai Jadeja Vs ITO

Whether once initial documents are admitted by CIT(A) and remand report has been called upon from AO, then same cannot be rejected without any cogent reasons and conducting necessary enquiries - YES : ITAT

CX - Iron and steel items and cement used for erection of foundation and support structures would also come within the ambit of definition of 'input' so long as it satisfies the 'user test': CESTAT

Cus - When necessary documents have been produced and assessee is an eligible passenger, an option to redeem the gold ought to be given, absolute confiscation should be an exception rather than a rule: CESTAT

ST - An activity performed by a sovereign/public authority under the provisions of law does not constitute provision of Taxable Service to a person and, therefore, no Service Tax is leviable on such activities: CESTAT

2022-TIOL-454-CESTAT-KOL

CCE & ST Vs Aryan Ispat And Power Pvt Ltd

CX - The CENVAT Credit of Rs.25,63,542/- availed on steel items has been disallowed by Commissioner (A) merely on the basis of decision of Larger Bench in case of Vandana Global 2010-TIOL-624-CESTAT-DEL-LB - Said decision was challenged by assessee before Chhattisgarh High Court 2017-TIOL-2853-HC-CHATTISGARH-CX wherein the Tribunal's decision has been set aside on 13.09.2017, i.e. after the date of passing of appeal order impugned herein - The very basis followed by Commissioner (A) has now been settled in favour of assessee - It is not in dispute that the various steel items have been used for purpose of setting up of sponge iron kiln along with power plant as also certified by Chartered Engineer have been duly verified by lower authorities in adjudication stage - Therefore, applying the "user test" principle, as followed by various High Courts, assessee is entitled to avail credit on steel items - Assessee is entitled to avail credit and therefore, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed with consequential relief: CESTAT

2022-TIOL-453-CESTAT-MAD

Rajan Ran Vs CC

Cus - Confiscation of the assorted gold jewellery and foreign currency - SCN was issued to appellant by DRI under sec. 124 of Customs Act, 1962 - The appellant falls into criteria of an eligible passenger - He is thus allowed to import gold jewellery upto 10 kilograms by paying appropriate customs duty - The currencies seized from him are sufficient to pay customs duty for gold carried by him - There is no evidence that appellant had made any attempt to conceal the gold jewellery - Being an eligible passenger, adjudicating authority ought to have given an option to redeem the gold jewellery and also the foreign currencies in terms of section 125 of Customs Act, 1962 - Further, appellant has also produced documents in the nature of invoices which proves that he has purchased gold jewellery from Singapore - When necessary documents have been produced and the petitioner is an eligible passenger, an option to redeem the gold ought to be given. Absolute confiscation should be an exception rather than a rule - Appellant has to be given an option to redeem the gold jewellery and currency and the Sony Bravia TV which was imported been carried by him - He, however, has to pay redemption fine to the tune of 10% of value of goods as redemption fine for release of gold jewellery, currency and Sony Bravia TV - As regards to penalty, there was no attempt to conceal gold jewellery by appellant - However, he has proceeded through green channel and about to exit the airport without paying customs duty - A penalty of Rs.55 lakhs under section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962 seems to be on the higher side and penalty of Rs.10 lakhs would suffice to the circumstances - The penalty imposed upon shri Vasu Arumugam is reduced from Rs.10 lakhs to Rs.5 lakhs: CESTAT

- Appeals partly allowed :CHENNAI CESTAT

2022-TIOL-452-CESTAT-MUM

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Vs CCE

ST - Appellant is providing 'Management, Maintenance or Repair Service' inasmuch as they carry out maintenance and repair of streets, street lights, water supply and drainage - They collect from the lessees of plots, an annual fee for providing such services, calling it as 'service charge' - Case of Revenue is that the appellant is liable to pay service tax on such service under category of 'Maintenance, Management or repair Service' - The Bombay High Court has considered the issue in case of the appellant 2017-TIOL-2629-HC-MUM-ST which has been accepted by Board as per - Since the issue is squarely covered in favour of appellant in their own case, the impugned orders cannot be sustained: CESTAT

- Appeals allowed :MUMBAI CESTAT