The Appellant failing to pay its Service Tax Liability under RCM in a stipulated time but shown as liability in the Service tax Return under the Finance Act, 1994, which was repealed and was replaced by the Goods and Services Tax
SEBI came out with the discussion paper which reduces minimum lock-in period for promoters after IPO, agrees to controlling shareholder’s concept. Markets regulator SEBI proposed to rationalise the definition of ‘promoter group’ and move to the concept of ‘person in control’ as well as lower the minimum lock-in periods for promoters and other shareholders after an IPO.
However, it clarified that the moratorium was only in relation to the Corporate Debtor (as highlighted above) and not in respect of the directors/management of the Corporate Debtor,
Notification No. 32/2021-Customs (N.T./CAA/DRI) | Dated: 08.09.2021 Government of India Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Notification No. 32/2021-Customs (N.T./CAA/DRI) New Delhi, dated 08.09.2021 S.O. 3639(E). In pursuance of notification No. 60/2015-Customs (N.T.), published vide number G.S.R. 453(E), dated 4thJune 2015 in Gazette of […]
MahaRERA to lay down procedure in the matter of grant of adjournments when complaints are listed for hearings before the respective Bench of MahaRERA as well as in the matter of submission of documents on which partiel rely upon/ place reliance in the complaints as filed and the mode of hearing of complaints:
Students converted from earlier scheme to revised scheme from July 21, 2021 to August 20, 2021 allowed to appear in Old/ New scheme in November, 2021 examination
Rambabu Singh Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court) Rambabu Singh (the Petitioner) filed the petitions to quash- two orders dated February 03, 2020; two order dated March 05, 2020 and one order dated December 28, 2020 (the Orders) passed by Additional Commissioner of State Tax (the Respondent) as the Orders were passed ex-parte and […]
Tribunal opined that the alleged non-payment cannot be called as willful or intentional act of the appellant to evade the payment of duty. Lastly, it was adjudged that it is the burden of the Revenue to prove whether the Assessee has intended to conduct evasion.
Rate of interest, if any, payable on the advance payment shall not exceed 100 basis points above the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (LIBOR) or other applicable benchmark as may be directed by the Reserve Bank, as the case may be
Learn about the penalty imposed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs on FERANBRAJ TOLL AND HIGHWAY PRIVATE LIMITED for violating Section 15 of the Companies Act, 2013.
