Kewal Krishan Vs Rajesh Kumar And Ors. Etc. (Supreme Court) Payment of price is an essential part of a sale, thus sale deed executed without payment of price is void: Supreme Court In Kewal Krishan v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors. Etc. [Civil Appeal Nos. 6989-6992 of 2021 arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 2033-2036 of […]
CESTAT held that when road construction is exempt, every activity related to the road construction is exempt including consulting engineer services, thus, the assessee providing consulting engineer services in the matter of road construction is entitled to get exemption under Sl. No. 13(a) of the Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax dated June 20, 2012
It was observed, that the interest paid on the loans was allowed by the AO himself as a deduction, however, no loss in connection thereto was allowed. The action of the AO accepting the Foreign Exchange but disallowing the loss appears to be erroneous.
Department contended that the Petitioner is a manufacturer of fish meal which is also used as a raw material for the purpose of making taxable goods namely, cattle/poultry/aquatic feed and does not fall under the ambit of Goods Exemption Notification.
Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling (MAAR) held that in a case where imported goods are sold and delivered directly from Container Freight Station (CFS) / Direct Port Delivery (DPD) to a state different from the state where assessee is registered, the assessee need not take a separate registration in that state.
HC held that in a case where assessee is accused of passing on fake Input Tax Credit (ITC) without actual moment of goods, a reasoned order must be passed by Joint Commissioner of State Tax, after acknowledging all the relevant material and contentions that the assessee may produce to satisfy the authorities.
Hyderabad CESTAT held that service of providing exhibition of movies by the exhibitor to the producers/distributors of such movies is not a support or assistance activity but is an activity on its own accord, therefore does not fall under the category of Business Support Service (BSS) as per Section 73(1A) of the Finance Act, 1994 (the Finance Act).
CESTAT Delhi held that mere failure to pay Excise Duty, not due to fraud or wilful misstatement is not sufficient to attract the extended period of limitation and the Central Excise Officer should have issued notice within one year from the relevant date.
Deify Infrastructures Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Delhi) The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (“CESTAT”) in the matter of M/s. Deify Infrastructures Limited v. Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs [Final Order No. 51927/2021 dated October 27, 2021], held that the value of […]
Shanthilal Movji Bhai Thakker Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) ITAT held that rental income from sub-lease shall be considered as business income as the assesee was engaged in business of real estate development and the property in question was sub-leased in furtherance of their business. Shri Shanthilal Movji Bhai Thakker (“the Appellant”) aggrieved by the order […]
