How would liability be determined in case of reverse charge services where services have been received prior to 15.11.2015 but consideration paid post 15.11.2015? Does a person providing both exempted and taxable service and reversing credit @ 7% of value of exempted service under Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, does he need to reverse the SBC also?
Sandvik Asia Limited V/s. CIT (OSD)- ITAT Pune – Interest on the refund is really a part of the refund and interest and refund are not two different things. When the Income-tax Officer has passed the order under section 154 of the Act without granting interest due to the assessee
A search and seizure action was carried out at the residence of Devdas A.Alva on 13.9. 2001.During the action,a loose paper file marked A-1was seized.Pages No 1-17 contained a copy of the catering contract entered into by Apporva caterers and Ooters Club and Page No. 26 to 28 were the bills
I.T.O Vs. M/s. Shree Gouri Shankar Jute Mills Ltd (ITAT Kolkata)-It is not in dispute that the advance was made for purchase of Jute during the course of business of the assessee. Since the supplies could not materialize, the assessee to protect its money started charging interest
since the only reason for denial of exemption u/s 11 was absence of registration u/s 12AA (which was granted to assessee society on 29.10.2010 with effect from 1.4.2010) for the relevant assessment years and on no other ground
Ministry of Finance ‘vide their Notification Nos. 21 & 22/2015-Service Tax dated 06-11- 2015 have decided that Swachh Bharat Cess @ 0.5% shall be levied on the value of all taxable services w.e.f. 15-11-20-15. Service tax of 14% and Swachh Bharat Cess of 0.5 % are chargeable on 30% of total passenger fare equivalent to 4.35% of the total fare in first class and all AC classes.”
In the case of Devang Paper Mills Pvt Ltd Vs UOI, it was held that merely mentioning wrong code in the process, cannot result into such harsh consequence of the entire payment not being recognized as valid, incurring further liability of repayment of the basic duty with interest and penalties.
Interest received by the assessee on account of delay in the payment of money due to it cannot be taxed separately but only as an income from business. Mehta Construction Co. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi), ITA No. 3967/Del/2010, Date of pronouncement: 16.10.2015
Mehta Construction Co. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Assessing Officer was driven to reject the book results, mainly on the ground that the profit returned on the contract receipt is very low and no stock register was maintained.
M/s Tejas Networks Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) As per the provision of sec. 192 of the Income-tax Act 1961, the assessee was liable to deduct tax at source on the payment made to Cadence Designs Systems Ireland .
