Tribunal ought to have allowed the petitioner’s Rectification Application and considered the petitioner’s Appeal before it on merits, inter-alia, taking into account the material and case laws which has been already filed by the petitioner’s during the hearing leading to the order dated 13th February, 2015.
Get insights into the GST Appellate Authority’s ruling on the classification of PP Leno Bags made by M/s. Ahmednagar District Goat Rearing and Processing Co-Op Federation Ltd.
In re SMVD Polypack Pvt. Ltd (GST AAR West Bengal) ‘Leno Bags’, made by the Applicant and declared by them to be made from woven Polypropylene fabric using strips or the like of width not exceeding 5 mm and without any impregnation, coating, covering, or lamination with plastics, are to be classified under Tariff Sub Heading […]
Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) a. The services provided by the appellant in respect of the projects executed by them for the period prior to 1.6.2007 being in the nature of composite works contract cannot be brought within the fold of commercial or industrial construction service […]
The product ‘Militry Malai Mithai’ as described in the Application will merit classification under Chapter Heading 2106 90 of the GST Tariff as ‘Sweetmeat’ and would be chargeable to 5% GST
PCIT Vs Starflex Sealing India Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court) SMS communication by Mr. Pinto to the Associate of this Court is contrary to the statement made on behalf of the Revenue yesterday by the learned Additional Solicitor General, assisted by Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate for the Revenue. Requesting an Advocate to put in a […]
President is pleased to decide that the Dearness Relief admissible to Central Government pensioners/family pensioners shall be enhanced from the existing rate of 7% to 9% w.e.1 01 07.2018.
Origins Build-Tech Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahemdabad) adjustment in respect of levy of fees under section 234E was indeed beyond the scope of permissible adjustments contemplated under section 200A. This intimation is an appealable order under section 246A(a), and, therefore, the CIT(A) ought to have examined legality of the adjustment made under this intimation in […]
Bhojison Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd Vs. ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) We notice that the compensation was not received as a result of termination of advantages associated with development rights but was claimed to be received to relinquish the rights of the assessee to sue against the vendor of the land. The assessee has received the compensation amount […]
M/s Shri Mahavir Industries Vs CGST (CESTAT Delhi) A proprietary unit is an individual legal entity and any refunds due to the proprietary unit cannot be adjusted or appropriated towards the demand which may be pending recovery against an another independent legal entity, of which the proprietor of unit is a partner. It has to […]
