Simplify GST learning with memory techniques. Join live sessions, master CGST sections, and retain knowledge effortlessly. Register now for practical GST mastery!
As regards applicability of TDS provisions, not two but three views exist on the impugned issue – (i) TDS u/s 194H – which was discussed by AO in the assessment order dt. 18/3/2012; TDS u/s 194C – which was discussed and upheld by AO in the assessment order dt. 18/3/2012; TDS u/s.194A – (which the assessee does not agree with) and not sought to be taken by CIT. Revision of order u/s 263 cannot be done if two views are possible on the issue.
In terms of section 66B, a service is taxable only when, inter alia, it is provided (or agreed to be provided) in the taxable territory‖. Thus, the taxability of a service will be determined based on the place of its provision. For determining the taxability of a service, therefore, one needs to ask the following questions sequentially:-
The CIT(A) has recorded a categorical finding on the basis of material placed on record to the effect that all the three conditions regarding identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the loan creditors were duly established.
Various additions have been made by AO without proper application of mind and has no distant connection with the material on record & third party transactions were added in the hands of the assessee without any basis or material and thus, the AO framed the assessment in a hypothetical way putting the assessee to enormous harassment and inconvenience.
Law cannot be interpreted broadly. It has to interpret case to case basis. It is very much clear that if the product is being manufactured for ultimate consumer and covered under provision of Legal Metrology Act and Rules, valuation of the goods shall be Under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act. But if the same product is being manufactured as a physician sample and removed for the free distribution, valuation shall not be under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as it is not meant for retail sale.
MCA has issued an order on 18.05.2016 clarifying the commencement of section 2(29), sections 435 to 438 and 440 of Companies Act, 2013. Section 2(29) court means— (i) the High Court having jurisdiction in relation to the place at which the registered office of the company concerned is situate, except to the extent to which jurisdiction has been conferred on any district court or district courts subordinate to that High Court under sub-clause (ii);
Rebate of up to Rs. 5,000 for resident individuals having total income of up to Rs. 5,00,000 as per Sec-87A of Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2017-18 i.e. F.Y. 2016-17.The rebate shall be equal to the amount of income tax payable on the total income for assessment year 2017-18 or an amount of Rs. 5,000, whichever is less.
With respect to the compliance of ‘related party transactions’ under section 188 of the Act, it is utmost important to determine and define a related party in relation to the company. Once, it is determined that the proposed transaction is with the ‘related party’, then it is necessary to confirm whether such ‘transaction’ is a prescribed ‘transaction’ within the meaning of sub-section (1) of section 188.
Notice under section 274 of the Act should specifically state the ground mentioned in Section 271(1)(c), i.e., whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of incorrect particulars of income. Sending printed form where all the ground mentioned in Section 271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law.
