In the instant case, the petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash show cause notice issued by the respondents. The petitioner to reply to the said show cause notice within two weeks. Thereafter, the Adjudicating Authority shall consider the objection filed and pass orders in accordance with law.
L. R. Brothers Indo Flora Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (Supreme Court) The appellant being a 100% EOU and into manufacture of cut flowers, without obtaining the approval of the Development Commissioner and without maintaining the requisite net foreign exchange earning, made DTA sales to the extent of Rs.38,40,537/ during 1998-99 to 200001 (upto […]
ITO Vs. Aravali Prime Consultants Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Jaipur) In this case, it is noted that the AO during the course of assessment proceeding made the addition of Rs. 2,63,15,000/- (138500 shares x Rs. 190 per share) on account of share premium received on issue of shares by the assessee company. Thus the AO observed […]
Commissioner of Customs Vs. Artex Textile Private Limited (CESTAT Delhi) we find that assessing officer have been making enhancement in a routine manner and the respondent who are regular importers are left with no choice but to sign on the dotted line for taking delivery of their goods to carry on their business, and also […]
Syed Maqsoodulla Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) In the present case also the assessee’s turnover was Rs.9,45,200/- and offered income of Rs.4,84,158/– u/s. 44AD of the I.T. Act. If the AO wants to make any addition, he shall ignore income returned by the assessee and proceed to scrutiny the accounts so as to make any addition. […]
In re Datacon Technologies (GST AAR Karnataka) Applicant were awarded a contract by the Bihar School Educational Board (BSEB) vide Work Order No. ST/281/18 DT dated 16.12.2018 for scanning of OMR Flying slip, OMR Marks Foil, OMR attendance sheet, OMR absentee sheet and finalisation of data. In view of the above, the applicant sought Advance […]
Civil structure involves engineering work at both levels i.e above and below the ground. We find that the applicant has performed civil work to create the landfill pits below the ground and therefore it is a civil structure.
The issue under consideration is regarding rejection of refund claimed by the appellant being service tax paid for the services received in the SEZ.
In order to enable the petitioners to avail Tansitional Credit in Electronic Credit Ledger. It was also prayed that the respondents should give effect to Form GST Tran-1 that had been manually submitted to the respondent-department to avail relevant Legitimate Input Tax Credit.
Sh. Saurabh Gahoi Vs. Pinky Sales (NAA) it has been revealed that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of rate reduction when the rate of GST was reduced from 18% to 5% on foot wear, as per the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 for the period w.e.f. 27.07.2018 […]
