Madras High Court held that writ petition against SCN demanding GST on construction of Mauritius Supreme Court cannot be entertained since the petition is premature and right course is to file detailed replay against the same.
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that steel grip insulating tape is an insulator and liable to be taxed under Entry 50 Part – II Schedule – II of the Madhya Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2002 [M.P. VAT Act] @ 5%. Accordingly, writ allowed.
Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Vs R.K. Swami Singh (Manipur High Court) Manipur High Court held that appeal is not maintainable since value of alleged seized gold is below the minimum threshold limit for filing an appeal i.e. Rs. 1 Crore as per instruction dated 02.11.2023. Accordingly, appeal dismissed. Facts- On 20.06.2014, the respondent herein was […]
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance of expenses purely on adhoc basis without rejection of books of accounts or without pointing out any specific deficiencies is not justifiable and liable to be set aside. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
Siddhartha Pattina Sahakari Sangha Niyamita Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) ITAT Bangalore held that the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act on the interest income earned from deposits made in compliance with statutory requirements. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed. Facts- The assessee is a cooperative society registered under […]
ITAT Delhi held that assessment order u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act is in violation of mandatory provisions of section 153D since mechanical approval is granted without application of mind. Accordingly, order is set aside.
Delhi High Court held that employees contribution to Employees Provident Fund [EPF] or Employees State Insurance [ESI] is to be made on or before statutory due date set out in respective EPF/ESI Act.
CESTAT Chennai held that claiming an exemption or a certain classification on a bill of entry is not mis-declaration or suppression of facts. Accordingly, demand for duty for the extended period or imposition of fine and penalty, for misdeclaration or suppression of fact not sustained.
Madras High Court held that ITC in respect of delayed GSTR-3B allowed provided GSTR-3B is filed on or before 30.11.2021. accordingly, claim of ITC barred by limitation in terms of section 16(4) of CGST Act but within period prescribed in terms of section 16(5) is allowed.
The petitioner has preferred the present appeal mainly contesting that respondent-department erred in denying claim of ITC for delay in filing GSTR-3B returns since the delay was on account of Covid-19 outbreak.
