Will Union Budget 2026 Break the ‘Sunday’ Rule? Speculation Grows as Feb 1 Nearing
As the countdown begins for Finance MinisterNirmala Sitharaman’s eighth consecutive Union Budget, a unique calendar conflict has sparked intense...
![S.56(2)(viib) Not Applicable to Shares issued to Non-Resident Holding Company: ITAT Deletes ₹198 Cr Addition [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/20/250x150_2113435-itat-deletes-198-cr-addition-taxscan.webp "S.56(2)(viib) Not Applicable to Shares issued to Non-Resident Holding Company: ITAT Deletes ₹198 Cr Addition [Read Order]")
![Madras HC affirms CBIC Notifications Extending Time limit to Issue order u/s 73 Ultra vires to S. 168A, says both ‘Illegal’ [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/20/250x150_2113517-madras-hc-affirms-cbic-notifications-extending-time-limit-issue-order-taxscan.webp "Madras HC affirms CBIC Notifications Extending Time limit to Issue order u/s 73 Ultra vires to S. 168A, says both ‘Illegal’ [Read Order]")
![Search and Seizure Proceedings, Powers, and Procedural Safeguards in New Income Tax Act [Old vs New Income Tax Series - Article 3]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/20/250x150_2113496-new-income-tax-act-old-vs-new-taxscan.webp "Search and Seizure Proceedings, Powers, and Procedural Safeguards in New Income Tax Act [Old vs New Income Tax Series - Article 3]")
![Transport of Minerals Inside Mines Is Not ‘Mining Service’: CESTAT Rejects Service Tax Demand [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/19/250x150_2113228-transport-minerals-inside-mines-not-mining-service-cestat-rejects-service-tax-demand-taxscan.webp "Transport of Minerals Inside Mines Is Not ‘Mining Service’: CESTAT Rejects Service Tax Demand [Read Order]")
Inadvertent Wrong Citation of Notification Not Fatal When Eligibility Conditions are same: CESTAT Sets Aside ₹82.84 Crore Demand of Erroneous Refund [Read Order]
The Kolkata Bench ofCustoms, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside a ₹82.84 crore demand for recovery of erroneous refund under Section 11A of theCentral Excise Act, 1944,...
![Inadvertent Wrong Citation of Notification Not Fatal When Eligibility Conditions are same: CESTAT Sets Aside ₹82.84 Crore Demand of Erroneous Refund [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/20/500x300_2113355-cestat-sets-aside-8284-crore-demand-erroneous-refund-taxscan.jfif "Inadvertent Wrong Citation of Notification Not Fatal When Eligibility Conditions are same: CESTAT Sets Aside ₹82.84 Crore Demand of Erroneous Refund [Read Order]")
SCN Lacks Precise BAS Classification: CESTAT Sets aside Service Tax Demand against Amway Distributor [Read Order]
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the service tax demand against an Amway distributor since the Show Cause Notice (SCN) lacked clarity and...
![SCN Lacks Precise BAS Classification: CESTAT Sets aside Service Tax Demand against Amway Distributor [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/08/500x300_2111025-scn-lacks-precise-bas-classification-cestat-sets-aside-service-tax-demand-against-amway-distributor-taxscan.webp "SCN Lacks Precise BAS Classification: CESTAT Sets aside Service Tax Demand against Amway Distributor [Read Order]")
PIMS Registration Timeline Directory, Not Mandatory: CESTAT Quashes Confiscation for Delayed PIMS Compliance [Read Order]
The Principal Bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal(CESTAT), New Delhi, held that the timeline prescribed under the Paper Import Monitoring System (PIMS) was directory and...
![PIMS Registration Timeline Directory, Not Mandatory: CESTAT Quashes Confiscation for Delayed PIMS Compliance [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/17/500x300_2112741-pims-registration-timeline-directory-not-mandatory-cestat-quashes-confiscation-delayed-pims-compliance-taxscan.webp "PIMS Registration Timeline Directory, Not Mandatory: CESTAT Quashes Confiscation for Delayed PIMS Compliance [Read Order]")
Non-Compete Fee Paid to Ward Off Competition is Revenue Expenditure, Not Capital Asset: Supreme Court [Read Judgment]
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that non-compete fees paid by an assessee to prevent competition are allowable as revenue expenditure under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and do not amount to...
![Non-Compete Fee Paid to Ward Off Competition is Revenue Expenditure, Not Capital Asset: Supreme Court [Read Judgment]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/20/500x300_2113472-non-compete-fee-paid-ward-off-competition-revenue-expenditure-capital-asset-supreme-court-taxscan.webp "Non-Compete Fee Paid to Ward Off Competition is Revenue Expenditure, Not Capital Asset: Supreme Court [Read Judgment]")