Brose India Automotive Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) Denial to avail CENVAT credit on Service Tax paid during GST regime under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) on import of services by the Appellant manufacturing company and its confirmation by the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I), Pune vide above referred […]
ITAT held that passing the assessment order against non existing entity is not sustainable in the eyes of law and the same is void ab initio.
Gold bar with foreign marking, source of which is not explained, is liable for absolute confiscation since the same would amount to the importation of a prohibited goods.
Hari Shamsher Kaushik Vs Jasbir Singh, Managing Director, M/S Accura Care Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Petitioner submitted that the learned Trial Court dismissed the complaint observing that since the company had not been impleaded as an accused, the liability of the respondent as its Managing Director could not be attached under section 141 […]
Arbitral Tribunal had, on sufficient cause being shown, the power to recall the order passed by it under Section 25(a) of 1996 Act, terminating arbitral proceedings.
Cox And Kings Limited Vs Sap India Private Limited (Supreme Court of India) Supreme Court referred following aspects of application of doctrine of ‘Group of Companies’, which is mostly utilised to bind non-signatories to an Arbitration Agreement, to a larger Bench for relook- A. Whether the Group of Companies Doctrine should be read into Section 8 of the Act or whether […]
आइये पहले हाल ही की घटनाओं की चर्चा करें . अभी आपने देखा होगा कि जीएसटी के मुख्य रिटर्न के आधार जीएसटीआर- 2 बी निर्धारित तिथि पर साईट पर नहीं आ सका और उसके लिए भी अंतिम समय पर यह निर्देश दिए गए कि इस माह डीलर्स अपने जीएसटीआर 2 -A से काम चला लें लेकिन यह व्यवस्था नियम विरुद्ध है बल्कि जीएसटी के नेटवर्क के अधिकार क्षेत्र के बाहर भी है.
Govind Ramling Solpure Vs State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench) The questions that arise for consideration of this Court is, (i) whether Rule 44(1)(i) of the Rules is in conflict with sections 34 and 35 of the Registration Act, 1908 or not, (ii) whether the impugned circular dated 12.7.2021 issued by the respondent […]
Part B of New Appendix I is a general entry whereas Entry 5 of Part A of New Appendix I is a specific entry read with Note 7. Tribunal held that assessee is eligible to claim depreciation at 60% of Computer Software.
After considering detailed reasoning by AO as to how assessee has introduced unaccounted money in the garb of LTCG, ITAT upheld addition.
