Join our webinar on Faceless Tax Assessments under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn concepts, challenges, and solutions from expert CA Hari Agarwal, FCA.
Ignorance of tax obligations on income earned from a partnership doesn’t excuse late filing of Income Tax Returns. ITAT Mumbai upholds Section 271F penalty in a recent case involving an advocate and his late ITR filing.
CESTAT Ahmedabad directs re-adjudication for verification of the use of steel items in the ONGC case. The Tribunal emphasises on the need for physical verification to determine Cenvat credit admissibility.
A detailed analysis of CESTAT Chennai’s decision in the Sesa Sterlite Ltd Vs Commissioner of GST case, focusing on the finalized ad valorem value of copper anode under Central Excise Rules.
Gujarat High Court held that order cancelling GST registration passed on the basis of very vague and cryptic show cause notice is unsustainable in law and liable to be set aside.
NCLAT Chennai held that the sub-Contractor, would not have any contractual relationship with the owner and would not be entitled to prefer any `Claims’ against the owner
Bombay High Court held that mere filing of an application under section 7(1) of the IB Code is not enough to invoke the bar of section 238 of the IB Code.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as the assessee being non-resident, income has been invested in India and not arisen in India.
ITAT Mumbai held that the employer has to remit both the contributions (employee’s contribution and employer’s contribution) to the Provident Fund within 15 days from the close of the month for which the employees earned their salary i.e., Salary payable.
ITAT Delhi held that issuance of notice by AO in the status of ‘Local Authority’ and assessment framed in different status i.e. in the name of ‘Artificial Juridical Person’ is bad in law and hence liable to be cancelled.
ITAT Ahmedabad confirmed addition on account of bogus long term capital gains from transaction in penny stock observing that mere filing documentary evidences did not discharge onus cast on the assessee to prove genuineness of the transaction.
