CESTAT Chandigarh held that CENVAT Credit in respect of input / input services used for construction of building which itself is to be used in the provision of output service of Renting of Immovable Property is admissible. Accordingly, order is set aside and appeal is allowed.
Calcutta High Court held that Bending and Bundling services cannot be claimed under the heading Clearing and Forwarding Services. Accordingly, demand of service tax under tax bracket of Clearing and Forwarding services to that extent quashed.
ITAT held that under the amended law, reopening after three years is barred where alleged escaped income is under ₹50 lakh. The notice issued under Section 148 was declared invalid and reassessment proceedings were quashed.
Madras High Court held that affiliation fee collected by the Universities does not fall within exemption hence such fees collected by the University from the Colleges as affiliation fees is amenable for levy of GST.
ITAT Chennai held that disallowance in terms of section 14A of the Income Tax Act read with rule 8D restricted to the extent of investment which yielded exempt income. Accordingly, disallowance restricted and appeal partly allowed.
The High Court ruled that refund of unutilised ITC on exports cannot be rejected solely due to late LUT submission. Substantive zero-rating benefits prevail over procedural lapses.
ITAT held that Excel sheets recovered from a third party cannot justify addition without direct evidence linking the assessee. In absence of corroboration and cross-examination, the cash investment addition was deleted.
Authorities now scrutinize NGO financial statements before granting or renewing registration. Proper documentation and clear charitable application of surplus are critical.
Recent AAR rulings have raised questions on whether ITC on imports is subject to Section 16(4). While one ruling applies the time limit strictly, another highlights structural differences in import transactions.
GST treatment of reimbursements depends on whether the supplier qualifies as a pure agent under Rule 33. Failure to meet conditions can make the entire amount taxable.
