Since freezing of bank account due to initiation of proceedings under PMLA has been done without due compliance of law, it was necessary to direct to defreeze the respective accounts and clear the cheques issued by assessee, drawn in favour of the Competent Authority towards the ITDS, PF, ESI, Professional Tax, Gratuity and LIC employees’ deductions, subject to availability of the funds in the account concerned.
Hash Constructions Vs Deputy Commissioner (Kerala High Court) Conclusion: Despite receipt of assessment order under Section 62, assessee-registered person had not filed any valid return within 30 days from the receipt of the assessment order. This ultimately had resulted in issuance of demand notice in FORM GST DRC-07, mentioning the amount due and payable by […]
Writ petition was maintainable despite the availability of an alternative remedy as the nature of challenge thrown in the writ petition was on the ground of absence of jurisdiction of Resolution Professional and the NCLT in IBC matters and not ‘wrongful exercise of the available jurisdiction’, thus bringing it within the fold of Article 226 of the Constitution.
Cloud hosting services provided USA company to its Indian customers were not covered under the definition of ‘royalties’ as per India-US Tax Treaty as the agreement was to provide hosting services simpliciter and was not for the purpose of giving the underlying equipment on hire or lease and accordingly, it could not be said as royalty within the meaning of Explanation (2) to Section 9(1)(vi) as well as Article 12(3)(b) of the Indo-USA Data by AO and DRP.
Application of bail by assessee was rejected as assessee had created three fake firms for procuring bills from the firms based at Delhi who had no purchases and tax which was not deposited for these transaction was utilized by the firms for not only availing ITCs but for getting the refunds by showing the sales to export units. Thus, refund was received for the tax which was actually never received by Revenue.
Service rendered by Tata Sons Ltd. under BEBP agreement between Tata Steel Ltd. and Tata Sons Ltd. was eligible as ‘input service’ for TSL and the service tax paid was available as cenvat credit to TSL under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
Since there was no allegation by AO on failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, therefore, reopening of assessment was not based on sound footing and hence the impugned assessment order framed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 was illegal and liable to be quashed.
Disallowance u/s 14A got restricted to the extent of exempt income, even if the provisions of the section 14A were attracted.
Since in statement in Form SVLDRS2, no specific notice for affording the opportunity of hearing was given to assessee with regard to variance of quantified amount, therefore, the officer was not justified in rejecting the application under Form SVLDRS2A stating inter alia that, the application was not eligible under the category of investigation, enquiry or audit.
Deloitte Haskins & Sells Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Conclusion: Amount of tax deducted at source from the payment made to the recipient of such income could be said to be the amount of expenditure incurred by assessee and paid during the year and, therefore, it was allowable to assessee as business expenditure. Held: AO did […]
