Join our webinar on July 24-25 for an in-depth analysis of Union Budget 2024. Learn about tax proposals, sector impacts, and investment insights. Register now!
Join CA Sachin Jain for a live course on Input Tax Credit from a litigation perspective. Gain practical insights and master ITC complexities. Register now!
M/s. Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) Allahabad High Court has held that Cenvat credit need not be reversed in respect of bagasse which is an agricultural waste and not a manufactured final produ The High Court quashed CBIC Circular No.1027/15/2016-CX, dated 25-4-2016 which treated bagasse as exempted product. It […]
Pending the deployment of DPT-3 Form on MCA 21 portal and in order to avoid inconvenience to stakeholders on account of various factors, it is stated that the additional fee, as provided under the Companies (Registration Offices and Fees) Rules, 2014, shall be levied after 30 days from the date of deployment of the DPT- 3 form on MCA 21 portal.
Ms. H.M. Industrial Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise (Gujarat High Court) Section 83 of the CGST Act inter alia provides that where during the pendency of any proceedings under sections 67, 73 or 74, the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue, […]
During the year 2018, the NAA has passed 28 orders against the complaints referred to it. Following is the gist of NAA Orders issued in 2018. It may be noted that out of 28 Orders, Anti-profiteering could not be established in 18 cases.
In the absence of a valid order u/s 120(4)(b) as well as section 127(1) of the Act the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax could not have exercised powers of an Assessing Officer to pass the impugned assessment order.
Section 194 H was applicable on on the discount allowed by assessee to the prepaid card distributors in respect of supply of SIM card/Recharge vouchers (SIM/RV).
Conclusion: Exemption under Section 54 was available to assessee for properties purchased in foreign countries as there was no condition in the provision that the property must be purchased in India prior to amendment in the provision in 2015.
ITAT held that Stock- in-trade can be considered as transferred only in the year in which the assessee has executed the sale deed transferring the stock-in-trade and not when the assessee has given stock-in-trade for joint development to the builder. As already held in the above cases, the provisions of section 2(47)(v) would apply only to the capital asset and not to stock-in-trade.
IAP: 2019-20 (For Departmental use only) MOST IMMEDIATE BY FAX F.NO. 380/1/2019-IT(B) Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board Direct Taxes North Block, New Delhi 12th April 2019 To All Pr. Chief Commissioners of Income tax & Pr. Director Generals of the attached Directorates of CBDT Subject: Central Action Plan for the […]
The amount reimbursed to the assessee (service provider) by the ONGC (service recipient), representing the service tax paid earlier by the assessee to the Government of India, would not form part of the aggregate amount referred to in clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section(2) of Section 44BB of the Act.
