Trivedi And Sons Pvt. Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) The petitioner has attached the screenshot showing the invoices uploaded on the portal. Though the petitioner was unable to file TRAN-1 due to technical glitches, yet the petitioner had filed grievances dated 13th April, 2018 and 20th April, 2018 on the portal. Thereafter, […]
It is said that they have issued fake invoices in the name of eight non-existent and fictitious business entities without physical movement of the goods and both being defacto operators have lodged claim of wrongful utilization of bogus ITC on the strength of fake invoices without physical receipt of the goods.
Notification No. 52 ibid as amended by Notification Nos. 30 and 34 ibid clearly prescribe vide new Condition No.8 which is extracted elsewhere in this order that no duty shall be leviable if raw material is destroyed within the unit after intimation to the Customs authorities.
Schlumberger Solutions Private Limited Vs Commissioner Central GST (Punjab and Haryana High Court) Admittedly, the petitioner has deposited amounts of Rs.2,29,61,536/-and further sum of Rs.1,16,51,272/- on account of interest and Rs.34,44,227/- as penalty, even prior to issuance of show cause notice. The question that arises for adjudication is as to whether the petitioner is entitled […]
Nava Bharat Ventures Limited Vs The Commissioner of Central Excise Customs & Service Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad) Rule 15 (Confiscation and penalty) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 provides for imposition of penalty if CENVAT credit has been wrongly availed which allegation must be made in the show cause notice with a proposal to recover such wrongly availed […]
Kaushaliya Sampatlal Dudani Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court) A bare perusal of the reasons recorded and further clarification of the information made by the revenue by way of affidavit in reply would make it clear that, the company Tuni Textile Ltd., was used in providing bogus accommodation entries of long term capital gain by certain […]
ACIT Vs Atlas Copco (India) Ltd. (ITAT Pune) Admittedly, the appellant had filed the primary details such as name, address, invoice, payment made, etc. However, the assessee could not furnish the confirmations from payees and for want of the confirmations, Assessing Officer made disallowance. The ld.CIT(A) following the decision of his order in the assessee’s […]
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances when the petitioner was removed by the Bar Council under proviso to Section 26(1) of the Advocates Act and when the same is confirmed by the High Court it cannot be said that the High Court has committed any error.
हाल में ही किए गए आयकर छापे जो कि गुजरात, मध्यप्रदेश और पश्चिम बंगाल स्थित व्यापारिक समूह पर हुए, ये सभी ग्रुप स्टील, केमिकल, लोहा, शिक्षा, अस्पताल, कंस्ट्रक्शन, बिल्डर, आदि व्यापार में लिप्त है. करीब 1500 करोड़ के अवैध और काले धन के लेनदेन की जानकारी समूह के मालिकों और मैनेजरों के वाट्सऐप चेट एवं […]
Section 57(iii) of the Act does not require that the expenditure incurred is deductible only if expenditure has resulted in actual income. As long as the purpose of incurring expenditure is to earn income, the expenditure would have to be allowed as a deduction under Section 57(iii) of the Act.
