This writ petition has been filed, challenging the levy of fees under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, for the financial year 2012-13 on the ground that the provisions of Section 234E of the Act can operate only prospectively, i.e, with effect from 01.06.2015 and not in respect of any earlier period.
Merely because entity has not responded to section 133 (6) notice the transaction cannot be doubted and be treated as non-genuine
Requirement of furnishing audit report in Form No. 10B before due date prescribed in section 44AB mandatory w.e.f. 1.4.2020 only.
CESTAT not find any error in imposition of composite penalty under Rule 173 Q read with Section 11 AC as in the instant case all the charges have been confirmed and the charges pertains to both the period prior to introduction of Section 11 AC and thereafter. Therefore, penalty under both the provision could have been rightly imposed.
Chief Commissioner, State Tax, Rajasthan, hereby assign the territorial jurisdiction under the said Act as mentioned in column no. 2 of the Table given below to the officers specified in column no. 3 of the said Table for the purpose of audit of a registered person for such period and at such frequency as assigned to them under Section 65 of the said Act.
It is evident that there was no requirement of NOC from the Drug Controller in respect of export consignment vide Shipping Bill No. 7099329 dt. 16.04.20 16 filed by the appellant for export of drugs to Liberia.
Cipra Enterprises Vs Commissioner Of Customs- (Export) (CESTAT Delhi) Learned Commissioner (Appeals) observed that it is not in dispute that the goods are not of Indian origin and hence, the appellant was not entitled to claim the benefit of MEIS. Thus, the goods were found to be mis-declared as the appellant had declared the goods […]
Sumiti Alloys Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P (Allahabad High Court) HC find that the Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding of fact which needs no interference by this Court as there was difference in the stock found by the survey team on the premises of the assessee on the basis of which the […]
Ball Aerosol Packaging India Private Limited Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) In this case what emerges from the record is that no fresh tangible material distinct from what was made available by the petitioner during the assessment proceedings is emerging and specific queries which have been raised with regard to issues now raised have already […]
In re Om Prakash Agarwal, Prop. M/s. Mittal Trading Company (GST AAR Rajasthan) Q1. Applicability of Notification No. 11/2017 – Central Tax Rate dt. 28th June, 2017 amended with Notification No. 24/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dt. 21.09.2017 and further amended vide notification no. 31/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dt. 13.10.2017, and furthermore amended vide […]
