Nayara Energy Ltd. Vs C.C. Kandla (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT Ahmedabad has had held that the catalyst ‘Petromax- MD’, consumed in the final product and not required for setting up of the plant or required for running, repair and maintenance of the plant, was not eligible for the benefit of exemption which provided that the goods […]
High Ground Enterprises Ltd Vs UOI (Bombay High Court) Petitioner has sought to question the refusal by the Officers of the DGGI, Mumbai to supply documents to the Petitioner seized by the officers and also sought a direction to the Respondents to hand over copies of the documents seized in January 2019 Petitioner, in the […]
Wadia Ghandy & Co. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The assessee is a Solicitor Firm and was initially constituted by three partners who were eminent Lawyers. He submitted, all the three partners had created huge goodwill which was definitely exploited by the firm. He submitted, for use of goodwill, the firm was required to pay 5% […]
Additions in respect of which penalty was confirmed has been accepted by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court, leading to substantial question of law. Thus when Hon’ble High Court admitted substantial question of law on additions, it becomes apparent that issue is certainly debatable. In such circumstances penalty cannot be levied under section 271 (1) (c) of the Act.
The product ‘Instant Tea Whitener’ as described in the application will merit classification under Chapter Heading 0402 of the GST Tariff and would be chargeable to GST at applicable rate under the said tariff entry, presently read with Notification No. 01/2017-Central tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 (SI. No. 08 of Schedule-I).
In re Sice-Vaaan Joint Venture (GST AAR Uttar Pradesh) I. Whether the composite supply of works contract provided by the applicant to NHAI shall be classified under entry (vi) to serial no. 3 of the CGST Rate Notification read with UPGST Rate Notification liable to effective rate of GST @ 12% including CGST and UPGST? […]
A correction has been made in the Appendix 3B, Table 2 to align/harmonize it with the ITC HS 2017/ Customs Tariff Schedule and the item entry is removed from the list of items, for which description matching is required to be done by RAs while processing the MEIS applications, as explained in Public Notice 68 […]
In re Konkan LNG Private Limited. (GST AAAR Maharashtra) The Maharashtra Appellate Authority confirmed the Maharashtra Advance Ruling Autority Order by holding that the Appellant is not eligible for taking ITC in terms of section 16 read with section 17 of the MGST ACT / CGST ACT ( CGST/ SGST / IGST ) on construction […]
Whether the parking lot services provided by the Contractor appointed by the Market Committee, which is a Government Authority is exempt under Notification No.12/2017 as the parking lot activity is covered under Article 243 of the Constitution.
In re S.P. Singla Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Punjab) Question: What is the classification of the ‘Works Contract’ services pertaining to construction, erection, commissioning and completion of ‘Bridges’ provided by the applicant as a subcontractor to the Contractors who have been awarded the construction contract pertaining to construction / widening of roads by the […]
