The Circular No. 12/2023 by the Commissioner of State Tax, Kerala, provides guidelines for the Audit Monitoring Committee (AMC) in completing audits under the KSGST Act, 2017. It outlines the procedures to be followed, including the review of Draft Audit Reports (DAR) and the decision-making process during monthly meetings. SGST/2726/2023/-PLC11 GST Office of the Commissioner […]
Madras High Court condones the delay of 10 days in filing appeal as the petitioner was unaware of the orders as the orders was sent to the Consultant’s email id.
ITAT Chennai held that disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for non-deduction of TDS is justified as TDS is not deducted and assessee has failed to file any evidence that receipts have declared the amount in their return of income.
ITAT Raipur held that payment towards purchase of beer from the State Government is an exception to the applicability of section 40A(3). However, brushing aside the said objection/ response filed by the assessee had rendered entire mechanism provided u/s 143(1)(a) as redundant and otiose.
The Rajasthan High Court orders a prompt decision on a GST refund application pending for 9 months, setting a limit of 60 days for a resolution in the case Rajcomp Info Services Ltd Vs Union of India.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that as work orders involves both supply of material as well as service, the same is classifiable under works contract service and not under Commercial and Industrial Construction Service.
ITAT Delhi held that maintenance charges not connected to the rental income cannot be considered as part of rental income. Accordingly, maintenance charge collected is taxable as business income.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that disallowance of revenue expenditure treating it as capital merely on the basis of description of the expenditure without any substantive record is unsustainable.
Delhi High Courts in Sesame Workshop Initiatives (India) Pvt Ltd vs Union of India held that interest should be allowed due to inordinate delay in refunding GST amount to petitioner, setting a precedent for similar cases in future.
Gujarat High Court held that merely because the petitioner inadvertently paid Rs.2000/- less towards principal outstanding amount of tax, it cannot be denied the benefit of ‘Vera Samadhan Yojna, 2019’.
