As regarding disallowance of interest-free loans on unsecured loans, it was concluded that the same were part of routine business transactions and were of short-term nature therefore, no addition for interest charged on the loans.
In response to the said notice, the son/legal heir of the deceased assessee submitted a reply on 01 April 2023 wherein he unequivocally apprised the respondent of the demise of his father/assessee, furnishing alongwith a copy of the death certificate as conclusive evidence, and asserted that the notice was null and void ab initio.
Where application under section 95 of Insolvency Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016 was filed, the same was permitted to be filed by a creditor in his individual capacity or jointly with other creditors or through a Professional (RP).
Assessee was a dealer in Iron and Steel, had filed its returns and paid the necessary taxes for the 2019-20 period. However, discrepancies were found, including the claim of ITC from a supplier whose taxes had not been filed.
Construction of canals/ pipelines/ conduits to support irrigation, water supply or for sewerage disposal, when provided to the Government, could not be exigible to service tax. Once tax was not payable in law, there was no authority for the department to retain such an amount.
CIT (A) was directed to reassess the long-term capital gain (LTCG) claim as it was found that new evidence submitted by assessee had not been considered during the earlier proceedings.
Where any amounts recovered or paid, including pre-deposits made in Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) appeal, the same should be reduced or adjusted against the mandatory 10% pre-deposit requirement.
During the relevant period 2018-19, assessee filed its returns and paid the appropriate, however, on scrutiny of the returns it was found that there was mismatch between GSTR 3B, GSTR 1 and GSTR 9.
Goods (tyres) imported by assessee was without any BIS markings being in violation of the statutory provisions were not permissible to be imported, and hence they were liable for confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act.
Once the lubricant became a taxable item at the hands of the manufacturer and importer, it became non-VATable good for the trader, therefore, ITC in relation to lubricants was required to be reversed.
