Dyani Antony Paul Vs Union Of India (Karnataka High Court) The main object of PML Act is to ascertain the proceeds of crime which involved in money laundering and attachment, confirmation and confiscation of the proceeds of crime in the form of properties and also to punish the offenders of money laundering. The date of […]
Wipro GE Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) In respect of transfer pricing addition made by Ld.AO. It is observed that DRP/TPO for year under consideration did not consider objections raised by assessee against comparables selected by Ld.TPO and simply followed DRP directions issued for AY 2014-15. As AY: 2014-15 has been set aside […]
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Dev Snacks Cheriyela (NAA) Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 27.11.2017 to 31.12.2017 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171(3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice dated 11.03.2019 […]
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Win Win Appliances (NAA) Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2019 specific penalty provisions have been added for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) which have come in to force w.e.f. 01.01.2020, by inserting Section 171 (3A). 9. Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between […]
Availment of exemption on temporary import of Durable Containers in terms of Board Circular No. 51/2020 dtd. 20.11.2020 – Provisions in ICES – reg…
Rishabh Jain Vs Assotech Ltd. (NAA) NAA held that DGAP Report dated 29.06.2020 cannot be accepted and the DGAP is directed to further investigate the matter as per the provisions of Rule 133 (4) of the above Rules on the following issues and furnish his fresh Report in terms of Rule 129 (6):- (i) On […]
Mukesh Kumar Vs Supertech Limited (NAA) It is observed that provision of the RERA Act, 2016 makes it mandatory for a real estate developer/promoter to maintain separate bank accounts for each of his projects registered separately under the RERA Act, 2016. In the case of the Respondent, the above provision implies that he was required […]
PCIT cannot form another view on the same issue in which the Assessing Officer has already satisfied himself and passed an order which clearly indicates that the Assessing Officer has verified and investigated the matter in detail.
Present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the order dated 29.10.2020 passed by the respondent No.2, Superintendent (Prev.), Central GST & C. Excise, Vadodara-II in File No. GEXCOM/AE/INV/GST/559/2020 on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;
Pradeep Kumar Vs Fusion Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Respondent had not passed on the benefit of additional Input tax Credit (ITC) to the above Applicant No. 1 as well a other homebuyers who had purchased them in his Project “Fusion Homes” for the period from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2018 and hence, the Respondent has violated the […]
