DCIT Vs Gilbarco Veeder Root India Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) The appellant before us is a company which has received a sum of Rs.90 crores from other concern, i.e. Portescap. The assessee-company as well as the other concern, i.e. Portescap, have common shareholders inasmuch as the entire shareholding of the assessee-company as well as that […]
Onus is heavily upon the revenue to establish that that assessee’s activity had crossed the threshold period of 12 months and hence constitutes PE in India in terms of Article 5(2)(g) so as to tax the receipts in India as per Article 7.
Discount on prepaid products offered to distributors by assessee engaged in telecom services was in the nature of commission which did attract of section 194H.
transportation of effluents cannot be treated as transportation of ‚goods‛ and hence there cannot be any service tax liability under ‘Goods Transport Agency’ as defined in Section 65 (150b) of the Finance Act, 1994. This being so, the tax liability of Rs.1 1,24,258/- and the penalty imposed thereof cannot sustain and are set aside.
In re Shubh Laxmi Cold Storage & Ice factory (GST AAR Rajasthan) Whether charges received by the cold storage for providing service of storing of eggs, which is produce of rearing of animals/poultry farming in cold storage is exempted from payment of GST in terms of S.No. 24 of Notification No. 11/2017-CT (Rate) and S.No. 54 […]
In re Solai Redirect India LLP (GST AAR Rajasthan) Whether EPC contract for set up of solar power generating system be considered as a composite supply with PV modules being the principal supply and be taxed at a rate of 5% (i.e. tax rate applicable on the P.V. modules)? As per the statement of facts submitted […]
Section 51 of the CGST Act 2017 provides for deduction of tax by the Government Agencies (Deductor) or any other person to be notified in this regard, from the payment made or credited to the supplier (Deductee) of taxable goods or services or both, where the total value of such supply, under a contract, exceeds two lakh and fifty thousand rupees.
M/s popat & Kotecha property & ORS. Vs Ashim Kumar Dey (Supreme Court of India) Issue- Whether after the amendment of the West Bengal premises Tenancy Act by Amendment Act No. 14 of 2001 with effect from 10th July, 2001 [which had incorporated sub-section (8) to Section 5] whether a tenant who defaults in payment of his/her share of municipal […]
Daman Computers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) Neither before the Assessing Officer nor at the appellate stage, Appellants adduced any convincing evidence to hold that it had retained its control over the manufacture of electronic computers at the factory premises of M/s. Kobian ECS India Pvt. Ltd. in Silvassa. In fact, the observations in the findings […]
Explore the Apar Mukhya Adhikari vs ITO case involving TCS on Tahbazari. Section 206C(1C) scrutiny, tribunal ruling, and key legal insights discussed. Full text included.
