While processing of TDS statement, the late fee, if any shall be computed in accordance with provisions of Section 234E of the Act. As a corollary, prior to amendment under Section 200A of the Act, levy of fee under Section 234E during processing of TDS statement is not tenable.
Mere submission of amendment by post to Charity Commissioner cannot be considered to be due registration with Charity Commissioner. What is required to be shown by assessee is that amendment carried out to trust deed has been registered with Charity Commissioner and his approval has been obtained.
This Petition is pending for more than a year on a simple issue as to who is the Proper Authority to decide the Petitioner’s case / claim. According to the reply affidavit filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs – Respondent no.5, it is the Respondent no.4 who is the authority.
Learn how to apply for GST registration online through the GST portal. Follow these steps to get your Goods and Services Tax Identification Number (GSTIN) hassle-free.
No Sec. 68 additions solely based on MOU found during search In Premises Of Third Party if assessee wasn’t even remotely connected to MOU
Galaxy Bar and Restaurant Vs State of Odisha and others (Orissa High Court) Aggrieved by the non-grant of a licence for an IMFL Restaurant ON Shop under the name and style as ‘Galaxy Bar and Restaurant at Nayagarh’, the Petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to the Opposite Parties to process […]
Whether appellants liable to pay service tax on consideration received for construction services which are composite in nature including both supply of materials and provision of services for the period prior to 01.06.2007.
CESTAT held that when Tribunal given a specific direction to extend cum-duty benefit to appellant, Adjudicating Authority ought to have calculated demand after granting benefit.
CESTAT held that refund claim of SAD is not time barred as no such limitation is prescribed under original Notification No.102 of 2007-Customs dated 14.09.2007
Integral Coach Factory Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) Brief facts of the case are that appellants are engaged in the manufacture of railway coaches and are registered with the Central Excise Department. On specific intelligence that they were clearing railway coaches without payment of duty, the officers of the Preventive Unit […]
