There is no error in the finding recorded by the Commissioner in this regard, as indeed the appellant did try to evade payment of service tax by treating the amount as a security deposit when in fact it was clearly an advance, which fact was very specifically mentioned in the Agreement. The intention to evade payment of service tax by suppression of material facts is writ large.
CIRP and avoidance applications, are, by their very nature, a separate set of proceedings wherein, the former, being objective in nature, is time bound whereas the latter requires a proper discovery of suspect transactions that are to be avoided by the Adjudicating Authority. The scheme of the IBC reinforces this difference. Accordingly, adjudication of an avoidance application is independent of the resolution of the corporate debtor and can survive CIRP.
The fact that shares were traded on stock exchange after paying securities transaction tax, and that money had been received through banking channels only demonstrated that they were not bogus transactions.
A.O. held that since the assessee is maintaining its books of accounts on accrual basis, the income in respect of bad and doubtful debt was required to be taxed on accrual basis except for the exceptions provided under rule 6EA of Income-Tax rules, 1962 read with Section 43D of the Act.
VRV Trading Co Private Limited. Vs Union of India & Ors (Calcutta High Court) 1. These intra-Court appeals have been filed by the writ petitioners against the order dated 22nd November, 2022 in W.P.A. No.23437 of 2022/ W.P.A. No.23438 of 2022 in and by which the learned Single Bench had declined to grant any interim […]
It is pertinent to note that to meet the emergency situation of additional expenses by the assessee the assessee has obtained cash not only from assessee’s father and mother but also the close relative i.e. the maternal uncle, maternal aunt as well as paternal uncle and paternal aunt and the said relation cannot be doubted by the Assessing Officer.
Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 ibid deals with imposition of mandatory penalty in certain cases. As per the Customs Act it is the importer who is to file the bill of entry to the proper officer u/s. 46 ibid while importing the goods and the assessment has to be made on that bill of entry and on such assessment, the duty is levied
Without any single evidence of taking credit in SCN, the SCN is bald & proceedings flowing from said SCN liable to be quashed on this threshold point itself.
The failure on the part of the Respondents to update their official portal, cannot be permitted to result in any sort of prejudice to the Petitioner, Notwithstanding the fact that an order of assessment has been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice.
Renu Ratnakar Bhattacharya Vs CIT (Appeals) (ITAT Mumbai) It is the case of the assessee that at the time of purchase of house property the assessee paid brokerage to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/- at the rate of 1% of the agreement cost of the new property to one Mr. Rajesh Mahendru. The assessee brought on […]
