Jagdish Pala Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) We find that the Appellant are engaged in the construction of Residential and Commercial Complexes and received the booking amount as well as instilment amount from his buyers. Revenue proceeded against them on the ground that they have evaded payment of Service Tax on […]
As a matter of facts, the income tax Act in section 251 of the I.T.Act dealing with the power of ld.CIT(A) does not provide for any power to the ld.CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution.
PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs Adithya Banavar (Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission) The Brief facts are: Complainants went to Mantri Mall and purchased one litre water bottle of Aquafina, a 330 ml Pepsi Tin and 350 ml bottle of Nimbooz, which costs them at the rate of Rs.20, Rs.50/- and Rs.50/-, respectively in […]
CBDT notifies National Bank for Financing Infrastructure and Development (NBFID) under section 10(48D) of Income Tax Act, 1961 vide Notification No. 31/2022 – Income Tax Dated: 18th April, 2022. MINISTRY OF OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE) (CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES) New Delhi, the 18th April, 2022 Notification No. 31/2022 – Income Tax S.O. 1825(E).—In exercise […]
In order to strengthen the process of security creation and monitoring of security created, asset cover and covenants of the non-convertible securities, SEBI vide circular dated August 13, 2021 had specified the manner of recording of charges by Issuers and manner of monitoring by Debenture Trustees (DTs), Credit Rating Agencies, etc.
Applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The statement of the applicant under Section 70 of the C.G.S.T Act, 2017 is self-implicatory which was extracted by coercion and made under duress.
To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside order dated 29.03.2022 made by State Tax Officer, Ghatak 1, Ahmedabad cancelling the Goods and Service Tax Registration of petitioner, and direct restoration or revival of registration of the petitioner firm;
Tribunal held that the foreign service provider being not covered under the term ‘Telegraph Authority’, the service provided by them will not fall under the definition of ‘Telecommunication Service.
The assessee categorically denied receipt of rent over and above what is reflected in its books of accounts. Nothing has been brought on record to contradict the version of the assessee either by the learned AO or by the learned CIT(A). We, therefore, hold that rental income which has not been received by the assessee cannot be brought to tax.
Gulmuhar Silk Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) Though it is the petitioner’s case that the impugned order is erroneous on facts, yet this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner would have ample opportunity during the course of proceedings before different statutory forums to show that the finding of fact arrived at […]
