In re B. G. Shirke Construction Technology Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Maharashtra) Question: – What is the applicable rate of GST on sale of aircraft by an NSOP holder to a private company who have applied for NSOP license, to be used for purposes such as corporate leisure, pilgrimage, cargo chartered flights? +The applicant has […]
Tushin T. Mehta Vs CCIT (Madras High Court) The writ petitioner’s father late Mr. Tushaar Mehta voluntarily filed his return of income for the assessment year 1996-97 on 28.03.1997 admitting the total income of Rs.11,06,129/-. The assessee had claimed long term capital gains of Rs.3,26,813/- on sale of property made during that year. The property […]
M/s. O.M.S. Sivajothi Mills Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) CESTAT Chennai has held that redemption fine under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 is an option in lieu of confiscation and hence, both (confiscation and redemption fine) cannot run simultaneously. It observed that when the order on confiscation remained unchallenged, and when even […]
In the year 2018, ICAI issued SA 720 (Revised), The Auditor’s Responsibilities Relating to Other Information. The Standard is applicable for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after April 1, 2018. The Standard casts a new reporting requirement on the auditors of listed entities and corporate entities to include a separate section […]
It has been noticed that importers importing motor vehicle parts are misclassifying the automobile parts under wrong CTH and item description is not proper. It has been found from the description/technical name mentioned in the bill of entry that the actual item and its nature is not forthcoming.
In re M/s Parmod Kumar Singala (GST AAR Rajasthan) 1. What will be the treatment of claiming of Input Tax Credit under Section 16 of the GST Act in regard to by-product Cotton Seed Oil Cake which is taxable at 0%? As per Section 17(2) of GST Act, 2017 the amount of credit shall be […]
We find from the provision that the Settlement Commissioner is free to grant further time for payment, under Section 245H(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 5. Having heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents, we are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of this case, it is not necessary to relegate the appellant to the Settlement Commissioner for enlargement of time, since the payments have already been made.
(1) These rules may be called the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019. (2) They shall come into force on the 1st day of September, 2019.
Chartered Accountants’ Association Ahmedabad (CAA) has made a representation to CBDT Chairman on issues/glitches in the new Income-tax portal and suggestive remedial measures. They highlighted Issues faced by the taxpayers at present while operating the new portal which requires immediate attention. Full text of their representation is as follows:- Chartered Accountants Association 27th July, 2021 […]
M/s. Hubergroup India Private Limited Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) Gujarat High Court has allowed a writ petition filed against denial of refund of Central Sales Tax (CST) to an EOU in a case when the inputs procured from the DTA were used in the production of goods cleared in the DTA during […]
