Applicant seeks interpretation of GST law with respect to doctrine of mutuality and relationship of applicant association with its members. The said interpretation of law is not mandated to Advance Ruling Authority for ruling under Section 97(2).
Signatories/directors cannot escape from their penal liability under Section 138 of NI Act by citing its dissolution. What is dissolved, is only company, not personal penal liability of accused covered under Section 141 of NI Act.
Nothing in Safety Glass (Quality Control) Order, 2020 shall apply to import of safety glass by a vehicle manufacturer for manufacturing up to ten thousand vehicles manufactured in India per financial year
SEBI permitted use of e- wallet for investment in Mutual Funds within the umbrella limit of INR 50,000 for investments by an investor through both e-wallet and/or cash, per Mutual Fund per financial year.
In re Monalisa Co-Operative Housing Society Limited (AAAR Maharashtra) In the instant case, outgoing member of the society, Mr Sanjay Prakash Sahjwani, has made payment of Rs 17,70,000/- to the society which appellant claims to be voluntary contribution on his own will and volition. On bare perusal of the affidavit submitted by the appellant in […]
IBBI held that it is evident that there was avoidable delay on the part of Mr. Rajput in filing application under Section 19(2) of the Code for non-cooperation of directors/promoters of CD, in taking control of assets of CD, in appointing registered valuers and in publication of Form G and he did not operate the […]
In terms of the proviso to the Section 42(4), company shall not utilise monies raised through private placement unless allotment is made and return of allotment is filed with the Registrar in accordance with sub-section (8). However, the company has admitted in its letter dated 18.11.2022 that it has utilized the money prior to filling […]
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs in supersession of the Order No. 01/2015 dated 09.01.2015, hereby appoints the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Mumbai South Commissionerate as the Central Excise Officer to exercise the powers of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994
CBIC earlier noted that the practice of payment of Service tax by way of book adjustment adopted by the Department of Posts and the Ministry of Railways was leading to incorrect accounting and reporting as the tax payments could not be reconciled by the field units of CBIC.
AAR held that GST not applicable on the amount recovered from employees for canteen facility and on amount recovered from employees for transportation facilities provided to them.
