Anand And Anand appeal success against ACIT order. ITAT Delhi ruling on TDS provisions. Key legal insights by Anand Bhattacharya, tax expert.
Liability of a partner for acts of the firm. Every partner is liable, jointly with all the other partners and also severally, for all acts of the firm done while he is a partner.
SGA Fashion Pvt. Ltd. Vs CMA Sandeep Kumar Bhatt (NCLAT Delhi) The documentary evidence on record establishes that the Appellant herein contended before the Learned Adjudicating Authority that pre-bidding qualification will not bind the bidders and sought for relief to be granted under the eligibility criteria at Clause 1.15 of the tender document. Having sought […]
Gandhar Oil Refinery (India) Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (Andhra Pradesh High Court) A perusal of material on record would show that GST refund application came to be made by the petitioner was on 22.09.2021, for the Tax period May, 2018 to May, 2019. Though, learned Government Pleader would contend that the said […]
It was observed that in NAA’s Order No. 57/2022, Project Ruparel Orion had actually been considered for profiteering. Hence the contention of the Respondent appears to be true and therefore this project need not be analyzed again for determination of profiteering.
Karunakar Singh Vs Prasu Infrabuild Pvt. Ltd (NAA) 1. The present Report dated 29.10.2021 has been received by National Anti‑ Profiteering Authority (NAA or the Authority) from the Applicant No. 12 i.e. the DGAP after detailed investigation under Rule 129(6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the […]
An appeal can be filed only on the basis of order/intimation, against which the assessee is aggrieved. In the absence of any such document, it will not be possible for any appellate authority to address the grievance of the assessee
ITAT find that since registration is restored by ITAT, the assessee is entitled for claiming deduction U/s. 11 in impugned assessment year
Rajesh Kumar Dudani Vs State of Uttarakhand (Uttarakhand High Court) It is the case of generating fake and forged invoices so as to claim ITC. In their objections, the respondent no.2 has given categorical details of such dubious transactions and has also submitted as to how in one day, the money has routed in different […]
In our opinion, the assessee is having no explanation with regard to generation of scraps and sale of the same. In our opinion, it is only a make-believe story so as to account the unaccounted cash generation by assessee. In view of this, we do not find any merit in the argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee.
