Even before the advent of GST, the credit of transitional credit of EC & SHEC was in dispute. Under pre-GST regime, a manufacturer of final products or a provider of output service was eligible to claim the CENVAT credit of EC & SHEC in terms of Rule 3 of the CENVAT Credit rules, 2004. Later on by Finance Act, 2015, EC & SHEC was subsumed into Service tax and Excise duty.
Understanding GST implications on watch with jewellery or jewellery with watch. Learn about the recent case rulings and jurisprudence developments in this area.
Every Company other than Government company, shall file a onetime return of outstanding receipt of money or loan by a company but not considered as deposits, in terms of clause (c) of sub-rule 1 of rule 2 from the 1st April, 2014 to 31st March, 2019 in form DPT-3 within 90 days from the closure of financial year […]
Mahnoo Khan Vs ITO (ITAT Jodhpur) In the present case it is noticed that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine and had not condoned the delay. He mentioned that there was delay of 740 days in filing the appeal, however, the claim of the assessee is that the delay is of 217 days. […]
Electricity has all the necessary trappings of ‘articles’ or ‘things’ and the benefit of additional depreciation cannot be denied. As held by the Constitution Bench, electricity is capable of abstraction, transmission, transfer, delivery, possession, consumption and use like any other movable property.
Indo-UK DTAA must be read as forming part of Indo-Spain DTAA as well and, therefore, the payment made by the assessee to the Spanish company for fabric testing would not constitute fee for technical services and consequently, section 195 of the Act has no application to such a receipt.
ITO Vs Globsyn Technologies Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) is the contention of the ld. AR is that no notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was served within the stipulated time prescribed in the Act and the reassessment order was without jurisdiction and prayed to dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue. Further he submitted that the […]
Gulab Badgujar (HUF) Vs CIT (Central) (ITAT Pune) The question which arises is the exercise of revisionary jurisdiction by the Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263 of the Act against the order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, wherein the assessment proceedings were re-opened on specific reasons recorded for re-opening. We […]
In re M/s. Sanghi Brothers (Indore) Private Limited (GST AAR Madhya Pradesh) Mounting of Bus/ Truck /Ambulance body on the chassis to be supplied by the Principal on delivery challan or any other owner of the chassis on which Bus/ Truck /Ambulance body will be fabricated by collecting job work charges including inputs required for […]
Veena Devi Karnani Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) Rule 127(2) clearly states that the addresses to which a notice or summons or requisition or order or any other communication may be delivered or transmitted shall be either available in the PAN database of the assessee or the address available in the income tax return to […]
