ITAT Ahmedabad held that appeal filed by the revenue is liable to be dismissed since the alleged accommodation entries are not entered by the assessee and no contrary evidences proving the same has been produced by the revenue.
The Appellant- Operational Creditor had undertaken to provide services for production of Television Commercial, print shoot and digital content for the Respondent -Patanjali Paridhan Private Limited under the terms of proforma invoice dated 17.10.2018.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the fuel oil lying in the engine room is part and parcel of the ship which is imported for breaking and hence CENVAT Credit is duly admissible on the same.
The AO proceeded to treat the transactions as penny stock and relying on the investigation report on penny stock from the Investigation Wing, he disallowed the same u/s 68 of the Act to the extent of Rs.1,28,58,450/-.
The Court further observes and directs that in the eventuality the amount lying in the frozen accounts mentioned in the Show Cause Notice dated 09.04.2024 are not equivalent amount requisite for the pre-deposit in terms with Section 107(6)(b) of the Act of 2017.
Kerala High Court held that amount of interest received by the foreman of a chit on defaulting subscriptions cannot be said to be amounts received as consideration for the supply of services. Thus, the same is not leviable to GST.
Bombay High Court held that rejection of application for waiver of interest under section 234C without addressing the submissions highlighted by the petitioner. Accordingly, waiver application remitted back for denovo consideration.
Kerala High Court held that the limitation period for re-opening assessment under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act was six years. Notice issued on 12.02.2020 is well within the limitation period. Thus, matter remitted back to Assessing Authority for fresh decision.
ITAT Chandigarh held that reassessment order under section 147 of the Income Tax Act cannot be passed without compliance with mandatory requirement of notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. Thus, order passed u/s. 144 r/w 147 set aside.
ITAT Bangalore remitted the matter back to CIT(A) so that assessee can file necessary documents with regard to disallowance made under section 37 of the Income Tax Act as order was passed by CIT(A) without adjourning the matter as sought by assessee.
