Payment of municipal taxes are directly related to letting out of the property, therefore, the same could not be allowed as a deduction under Sec. 57(iii) for the purpose of earning of amenities charges by the assessee.
Akshaye Khanna Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee had been using speed-boat for travelling from Mumbai to Alibaug for his professional activities like acting, practice, health, maintenance, story telling etc. and hence, business asset has been utilized by assessee for commutation for professional work and therefore, the expenditure against the same was allowable to the assessee […]
Since the workmen was employed by the contractor not by assessee-BHEL and no wages were ever been paid to them by BHEL as they were in the service of the contractor, therefore, the workmen was not under the command, control, management of the BHEL and, concomitantly, the contractor had absolutely control over the workmen in performing such duties. More so, assessee-BHEL had nothing to do with the termination of services of the workmen by the contractor.
Sunaiba Industries Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) The petitioner is the selling dealer of the goods. The goods were being transported from Delhi to Kanpur in 30 builties. Only on account of improper invoice in respect of some of the builites, the goods have been seized and directed to be released on furnishing […]
Kanaiyalal Muljibhai Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) The issue before us is, whether the house constructed by the assessee on a plot purchased in the name of HUF, exemption under section 54F, is available to the assessee or not ? The Revenue is of the opinion that for claiming exemption under section 54F, the investment ought […]
In Re Resistoflex Dynamics Pvt. Ltd (GST AAR Uttar Pradesh) (a) Whether the air-springs imported by the Applicant are classifiable under HSN heading 8607 (i.e. parts of coach work of railway running stock) and thus covered under Entry No. 241 of Schedule-I of GST rate notifications? It will not be appropriate to classify air springs […]
In re Dabur India Ltd. (GST AAR Uttar Pradesh) The issue presented before us, the classification of `Odomos’ has to be examined under the relevant provisions of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as to whether the product `Odomos’ should be classified under Chapter-38 or under Chapter 30 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. We find […]
It was stated by learned counsel for the State that the goods have been released and the amount of tax and penalty has been deposited by the petitioner. It was further stated that the impugned order is appealable under Section 107 of Punjab General Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
Ifthe employees’ share of contribution is paid before the due date of filing the return u/s 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 then no disallowance can be made.
CESTAT Chennai has held that import of second hand machinery cannot be subjected to imposition of anti- dumping duty (ADD) meant for new machinery. It observed that purpose of anti-dumping is served, in case of second-hand machinery, by way of re-appraisement of declared value, and imposition of ADD would be nothing but double jeopardy.
