Delhi HC suspends demand
notice issued by DGFT officers seeking recovery of sanctioned SFIS benefits
under relevant FTP during the period 2003 to 2014; Demand had been raised
pursuant to Bombay HC ruling in Shri. Naman Hotels wherein it was held that SFIS
benefits cannot be availed by companies rendering services under foreign brand;
Court notes petitioner’s reliance on judgment in Simplex Infrastructure Ltd
which had followed Gujarat HC decision in Alstom India Ltd; Petitioner has
challenged vires of Rule 7(3) of Foreign Trade (Development &
Regulation) Rules, Para 7(10) of FTP, constitution of Policy Interpretation
Committee (PIC) for the period prior to 2012, while pleading that concerned
DGFT officers have no jurisdiction to issue such demand notice in contravention
of Section 16 of Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act; HC issues
notice to Revenue, and lists the matter for hearing on April 9, 2018 :
Delhi HC
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
India-Mauritius DTAA Protocol Notified: Key Tax Implications
The Government of India has notified the amendment to the Protocol of the India-Mauritius Double Tax Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) on 13 Oct...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
In a recent informal guidance letter, SEBI clarified whether a cousin of a Promoter Group member qualifies as a person ‘related to promote...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
Key features of File Validation Utility (FVU) version 3.3 FVU 3.3 will be applicable for quarterly TDS/ TCS statements pertaining to...
-
CIT vs. The Instalment Supply Ltd (Delhi High Court) The assessee bought 1614 items of computer systems for Rs.40 lacs from HCL Hewlett ...
-
Facts The applicant („A‟) is a closely held Public Limited company incorporated in India in the year 1953. A‟s shareholder included A (...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
Until now, 'Samaritans' is not how the Independent Directors are purported by Clause 49 in the Listing agreement. An Independ...
-
1. Concept of “limited liability partnership” LLP is an alternative corporate business form that gives the benefits of limited liability ...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
No comments:
Post a Comment