Kerala High Court directs readjudication of input tax credit (ITC) claim, stating that discrepancies between GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B alone cannot be grounds for denial
Explore the Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Kolkata) case regarding the determination of duty on iron ore fines based on WMT.
Supreme Court held that an aggrieved party is entitled to receive compensation from the party who has broken the contract whether or not actual damage or loss is proved to have been caused by the breach.
Kerala High Court dismissed the writ petitioner stating that as authority empowered u/s. 5 of PMLA Act scrutinized the materials while passing provisional attachment order and hence it is not justifiable to exercise extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
ITAT Mumbai held that the entire assessment order have not been passed in the case of non-existing entity i.e. amalgamated entity is null and void and hence liable to be quashed.
ITAT Chennai held that the services rendered by non-resident agent for completion of export commitment would not fall under the definition for fee for technical services. Hence, disallowance alleging non-deduction of TDS unjustified.
ITAT Mumbai held that the fee paid by the assessee i.e. Tata Consultancy Services towards the brand to Tata and Sons Ltd. is not capital in nature for the reason that the brand is not owned by the assessee. Hence, there cannot be any TP adjustment towards the amount that ought to have been received by the assessee towards brand royalty.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the assessee is engaged in development of the infrastructure facility and therefore, a developer, which confers right of eligibility to the assessee to claim benefits u/s. 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act. Mere referring assessee as a contractor in the agreement cannot deprive assessee from claiming deduction u/s. 80IA(4).
NLCT Chandigarh held that Resolution Plan in respect of corporate debtor BBN Foods Hi-Tech Processing Private Limited being in accordance with Sections 30 and 31 of the Code and complies with Regulations 38 and 39 of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 is approved.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that government grants received in lieu of FRP i.e. Financial Restructuring Plant is not required to be reduced from the cost of capital assets. Accordingly, reopening of assessment unjustified.
