Interest income earned from staff loans and advances was incidental to the business of power generation and qualifies as “business income” by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Orissa High Court in Odisha Power Generation Corporation Ltd.
No goods had been sold, and forged bills were prepared. Furthermore, no vehicles had passed through toll plazas, and no registration numbers were available. On appeal.
The bench stated that Tribunal after concluding that the BCCI’s Appeal before it “was not maintainable”, exceeded its jurisdiction in recording the above observations virtually upholding the impugned communication/order.
Employment on compassionate grounds had been evolved to help dependents, of our employees who die or become totally and permanently disabled while in harness, and to overcome the immediate financial difficulties on account of sudden stoppage of the main source of income. The employment under the ‘Scheme’ would be considered only if there were indigent circumstances necessitating employment to one of the dependents and the deceased employees service record was unblemished.
Assessee challenged the order of cancellation of registration on the ground of not providing an opportunity of hearing as well as such order was passed without assigning any reason for cancellation of the registration of assessee.
The Court emphasized that any denial of ITC should clearly reference the applicable clause under Section 17(5) to allow the taxpayer a reasonable opportunity to contest the claim.
ITAT, by going through established precedents, held that AO had not recorded any dissatisfaction with assessee’s voluntary disallowance, nor had he provided any basis for invoking Rule 8D
This amount of tax had been deposited by assessee from its own pockets and the GST on the amount of notice pay recovery was deposited by assessee as and when such recovery was made.
Assessee clarified that Form ST-3 was incorrect as some of the invoices inadvertently remained unaccounted for the said period and the correct amount of credit was carried forward in Form TRAN-1.
Section 145(3) couldn’t be invoked without identifying specific defects in the books of accounts and that mere suspicion of increased cash sales was not sufficient to make an addition under Section 68.
