"21 October 2018" Archive

Requirement – MGT – 9 Big Question?

Whether Companies required preparing MGT-9 after 31st July, 2018? Whether Companies are required to comply both Section 92 and Section 134? While complying Section 134, MGT-9 required being published on website of Company or Annual Return i.e. MGT-7 required publishing on website of Company? If Company doesn’t having website in such cas...

Read More
Posted Under: Company Law |

GSTR-3B for Sept 2018 Due date extended to 25th Oct 2018

Notification No. 55/2018-Central Tax (21/10/2018)

On account of apprehensions by trade & industry relating to last date for availment of ITC for the period July 2017 to March 2018 & with a view to give more time for the same, the last date for furnishing GSTR-3B for Sept., 2018 is being extended up to 25th Oct.2018.  Relevant Notification is as […]...

Read More

Analysis- Special Audit under GST

Special Audit under GST helps the GST officers to take the assistance of chartered/ cost accountant to determine tax liabilities in complex cases. As a result, professional expertise of a chartered/ cost ensures the government interest in the lawful and legal way for safety....

Read More

GST on Special Economic Zone & one case study on SEZ relating to impacts of GST on Supply of Services provided by SEZ Developer to SEZ Unit/s

GST on Special Economic Zone & one case study on SEZ relating to impacts of GST on Supply of Services provided by SEZ Developer to SEZ Unit/s Section 2 (19) of Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 “Special Economic Zone” shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (za) of section […]...

Read More
Posted Under: Company Law |

Co-Op HSG Society cannot charge Transfer fees in excess of permissible fees as donation

Alankar Sahkari Griha Rachana Sanstha Vs Atul Mahadev Bhagat & Anr (Bombay High Court)

Alankar Sahkari Griha Rachana Sanstha Vs Atul Mahadev Bhagat & Anr (Bombay High Court) When the persons come together with common object of housing, after formation of a Cooperative Society, they are governed under rules and bye-laws of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. So far as the members are concerned, the Cooperative Housing...

Read More

Penalty cannot be levied if claim was as per judicial precedents

Pr. CIT Vs Dhariwal Industries Ltd (Bombay High Court)

PCIT Vs. Dhariwal Industries Ltd (Bombay High Court) Mr Tejveer Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue, relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Principal CIT-2 v/s Shree Gopal Housing and Plantation Corporation, Mumbai in Income Tax Appeal No.701 of 2015 decided on 6th February, [&helli...

Read More

Interest on FDRs to avail OD facilities for remuneration to partners?

ITO Vs Suresh Chand Ravi Datt (ITAT Jaipur)

ITO Vs Suresh Chand Ravi Datt (ITAT Jaipur) There is not dispute that the business of the assessee dealing in food grains, oil seeds and pulses etc is a seasonal business depending upon crop seasons. Therefore, during the non harvesting season the assessee is not having much business activity and accordingly the funds which are […]...

Read More

Deemed dividend Law applies only to Accumulated Profits at start of relevant FY

Sri Srikanth Marru Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)

Sri Srikanth Marru Hyderabad Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) There is a nexus between the loan taken from the LIC and the premium paid for the Keyman Insurance Policy. Since the Keyman Insurance Policy is for the benefit to the assessee, it was held that the same is taxable as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the […]...

Read More

Introducing Customers to Financial Institutes for Commission is BAS

Preet Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs C.S.T.-Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

Preet Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs C.S.T.-Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) Business model of the appellant was such that they used to get commission from financial institutes for introducing customers. The said financial institutes used to pay commission in a fixed percentage on the loan amount disbursed to the end customer. After this commi...

Read More

Section 263 order without considering reply of Assessee is invalid

M/s. Great Heights Infratech Pvt. Vs Pr. CIT (ITAT Delhi)

Gauhati High Court in the case of Leela Choudhary vs. CIT 289 ITR 226 held that Order passed under section 263 of the I.T. Act without considering the reply of the assessee would not be valid....

Read More