"11 March 2020" Archive

C-Form benefits cannot be rejected merely for belatedly filing

TATA Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court)

TATA Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court) The issue under consideration is whether Tribunal was correct in rejecting the C-Forms submitted by the petitioner and hence denying statutory benefits? The Appellate Tribunal at the threshold has rejected the declaration forms on the ground...

Read More

HC Allows filing of GST TRAN­1 which was not filed due to technical glitches

Kambay Aromatics Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)

Kambay Aromatics Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) It appears that if the petitioner could not upload the form GST TRAN­1 due to technical glitches and in spite of various representations made by the petitioner, he was not allowed to upload the form GST TRAN­1. In view of the settled legal position as stated […]...

Read More

Delay in uploading of GST TRAN 1 due to technical glitches was justified

Rohan Dyes and Intermediates Ltd. Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)

Assessee should upload the form GST TRAN1 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of this order as the delay was due to technical glitches in the GST portal....

Read More

Section 234E is not violative of Constitution of India: Madras HC

Qatalys Software Technologies Private Limited Vs Union of India (Madras High Court)

Qatalys Software Technologies Private Limited Vs Union of India (Madras High Court) Revenue is right in contending that Section 234 (E) of the Act is not a penalty. Penalty is levied under Section 271 (H) and is not automatic. Penalty is levied only when tax is deducted at source along with interest fee is not deposited […]...

Read More

SEZ Units Entitled to Claim Refund of Unutilized IGST Credits

Britannia Industries Limited Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)

High Court observed that as per the definition of ISD under Section 2(61) of CGST Act and facts of the present case, it is not possible for a supplier of goods and services to file a refund application to claim refund of input tax credit distributed by ISD....

Read More

No deduction for education expenses incurred prior to set up of business

Shri Harshvardhan Johari Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur)

Assessee-sole proprietor was not eligible for a tax deduction for his own education expenses as the same could not be treated as business expenses and the point in time when the expenditure was incurred, the business of the assessee was not set up. ...

Read More

Misplacement of papers by one of office staff- ITAT condones 368 day delay

Shakti Hormann Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad)

Shakti Hormann Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) We find that the assessee is not benefitting in any way by not filing the appeal in time before the Tribunal. The assessee has explained the reasons as misplacement of papers by one of the office staff. This is one of the possible reasons for not being […]...

Read More

Form TRAN-1 | Technical glitches on GST Portal | Applicant cannot be Penalised

Darsh Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd. Vs Superintendent, Central GST (Gujarat High Court)

Darsh Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd. Vs Superintendent, Central GST (Gujarat High Court) The writ-applicant is engaged in the business of manufacturing of pharmaceutical products. As provided under Section 140 of the CGST Act, 2017, the writ applicant tried to upload Form TRAN-1 for the purpose of claiming the ITC credit on-line. However on account...

Read More

Transitional credit Claim| Enable filing of form GST TRAN-1 – HC

Siddhi Developers vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)

Siddhi Developers vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) It appears that if the petitioner could not upload the form GST TRAN­1 due to technical glitches and in spite of various representations made by the petitioner, he was not allowed to upload the form GST TRAN­1. In view of the settled legal position as stated […]...

Read More

Section 68 Addition justified for un-reconciled credit balance

Jupudi Venkateswara Rao Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

Jupudi Venkateswara Rao Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) Ld.CIT(A) has given a clear finding that the assessee failed to produce the purchases book, stock register etc to verify the purchases or the unaccounted sales, the assessee has taken a different stand before the ITAT and argued that the difference was not related to purchase and sales [...

Read More

Search Posts by Date

July 2022
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031