Smt. Naina Rani Vs Pivotal Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Fact of the Case: The brief facts of the case are that vide her application dated 30.11.2018 filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Applicant No. 1 had alleged profiteering by the Respondent in respect of purchase […]
. It may kindly be noted that annual quota of Urad for the year 2020-21 is 4 Lakh MT and will be effective from 1st May, 2020 to 31st March 2021. Accordingly, successful applicants will have to ensure that the import consignments of Urad reaches the Indian ports on or before 31.03.2021. Request for extension of time will not be entertained.
CBDT has released the synthesised text for India-Latvia tax treaty. It represents their shared understanding of the modifications made to the Agreement by MLI. LATVIA SYNTHESISED TEXT OF THE MULTILATERAL CONVENTION TO IMPLEMENT TAX TREATY RELATED MEASURES TO PREVENT BASE EROSION AND PROFIT SHIFTING (MLI) AND THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA […]
As you are aware, several cases of monetization of credit fraudulently obtained or ineligible credit through refund of Integrated Goods & Service Tax (IGST) on exports of goods have been detected in past few months. On verification, several such exporters were found to be non-existent in a number of cases. In all these cases it has been found that the Input Tax Credit (ITC) was taken by the exporters on the basis of fake invoices and IGST on exports was paid using such ITC.
Assessing Officer comes to a conclusion that the assessee had failed to collect the STT or had failed to pay such STT to the credit of the Central Government, it would not ipso-facto lead to imposition of penalty. Once such a conclusion is reached, the assessee is required to be provided reasonable opportunity of hearing and during the hearing if the assessee can prove that there was reasonable cause for such failure, no penalty shall be imposed.
In re M/s. Apar Industries Limited (GST AAR Maharashtra) Authority for Advance Ruling is supposed to function within the parameters or the GST Act and Rules and we find that there are no specific provisions under the GST Act, to transfer such application proceeding to the concerned State and there are no provisions for refund […]
Applicant contended that Laying of Paver Blocks on land does not amount to construction of Immovable property u/s. 17(5) (c) of the CGST Act, 2017 and are to be construed as moveable items. With respect to eligibility of ITC applicant has stated that, the prohibition to avail input tax credit is applicable only in respect of expenditure which is capitalized in the books of account and since, expenses on Paver Blocks are not capitalized as a part of immovable property (Land) in their books of accounts, ITC is allowable to them.
In re Vivek V. Ratnaparkhi- M/s. Madhurya Chemicals (GST AAR Maharashtra) A. Whether the classification of ‘Shatamrut Chyavan’ falling under TSH 2309 90 10 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as adopted to GST attracting ‘NIL’ rate (0%) of IGST (0%) CGST + (0%) SGST) as per List of Exempted Goods as per Sr. No. 102 […]
In order to contain the spread of Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19), some precautionary measures are required to be taken by all the employees and the Ministries/Departments. In this regard, it has been decided to issue the following advisory for the well-being of Government employees and in public interest.
It has been held in various decisions that action u/s. 263 can be taken only when there is lack of enquiry or no enquiry. However, in the instant case necessary enquiry was conducted. Therefore, merely because the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree with the manner of enquiry conducted by the AO he cannot substitute his own reasons and held the order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.
