Madras High Court sets aside GST demand order due to lack of reasonable hearing opportunity. Orient Electricals case detailed analysis.
CESTAT Chandigarh rules in favor of Microsoft India, stating services rendered to overseas entity are exports, exempting from service tax.
Sanjeev Mittal Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) – CIT(A) can admit additional evidence after giving full opportunity to AO to rebut/offer comments in remand proceeding.
Appellant’s relationship with CIL was one of sale/purchase on a principal-to-principal basis. Therefore, appellant could not be held liable for service tax under BAS.
Service tax demand on services from abroad before 18.4.2006 isn’t sustainable. Issuing authority must specify applicable sub-clause in notice.
Karnataka High Court rules in favor of employers & employees, declaring para 83 of EPF Scheme & para 43A of Pension Scheme unconstitutional & arbitrary.
Recently, we have observed that the Companies who failed to comply with the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 within the stipulated time are witnessing the show cause notice from the Registrar of Companies in pursuance to power vested u/s 454 of the Companies Act, 2013 and consequently, penalties are being imposed upon the Company […]
Join our live course to learn expert strategies for replying to GST notices, SCNs, and fake ITC notices. Understand litigation nuances, evidence insights, and practical tips for effective responses. Register now!
Delhi HC ruled that PCIT’s rejection of an application under Section 119(2)(b) of Income Tax Act lacked reasoning. Court remanded matter for fresh consideration.
Delhi High Court held that the documents which were seized during the course of search does was unsigned Agreement to sell (ATS) which does not contain name of assessee, the said material cannot be said to pertain/pertains to assessee.
