Pr. CIT Vs M/s. E Smart Systems Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court) It is relevant to state that AO in his remand report dated 10.10.2016 did not dispute the veracity of the additional evidences furnished by the assessee and further learned CIT(A) did not admit the additional evidences purely on technical ground which is wholly […]
In re Uttaranchal Filament (India) (GST AAR Uttarakhand) Whether the meaning of word ‘lapse’ in Notification No. 20/2018-Central Tax (Rate) would mean lapse for refund or lapse for utilization of input tax credit for payment of output tax liability. Held- Notification No. 20/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 26-7-2018 deals with refund of inverted duty structure only. […]
DIC Fine Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) It was a case where on account of the disallowance made by the AO, the loss returned by the assessee stood converted into positive sum and made the appellant eligible to claim deduction u/s 10AA of the Act. We thus find that as per the position […]
Cash payments in excess of Rs. 20,000 made on bank/public holidays towards purchase of construction materials in the activity of real estate development could not be subjected to disallowance under section 40A(3) in view of rule 6DD(J).
Rockwell Industries Vs Commissioner of Trade & Taxes & Anr. (Delhi High Court) HC held that it appears to us that in the present case the default assessment order has been generated only to defeat the refund claim of the petitioner, which, in any event, ought to have been paid well before the impugned orders […]
CESTAT Mumbai has held that demurrage was part of handling of import and export shipments of the assessee and therefore Cenvat credit of tax paid on such demurrage charges would be available. The demurrage charges were paid by the C&F service provider on behalf of the assessee and billed to him as out of pocket expenses. The Tribunal also observed that Customs Clearance Service also qualified to be input service covered by Cenvat Rule 2(l).
Ms. Sandvik Tooling Sverige AB Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune) The assessee is non-resident and was providing software services to Sandvik Asia Ltd. and also was providing IT support services to the said concern. The question which arises in the present appeal is whether the consideration received by assessee from the payer i.e. Sandvik Asia Pvt. […]
Arora & Co. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Senior Standing counsel for GST submits that petitioner was given an opportunity to submit evidence to demonstrate technical glitch for re-considering his request, however, he failed to do so and thus his representation was rejected. He submits that as per GST system logs, […]
Further it is the claim of the assessee that subsequent to the sale of flat on which depreciation was claimed assessee has purchased a flat the income from which has been offered under the income from house property and that the new flat enters into the block of asset irrespective of the use. When the income from the new flat is being offered as income from house property by no stretch of imagination it can be said that it falls into the block of depreciable assets.
Ms Bhangal Construction Co. Vs ITO (ITAT Jalandhar) Simpliciter payment towards hiring charges of cranes cannot be brought within the sweep of the definition of the term work as envisaged in Sec. 194C of the IT Act. We thus are of the considered view that the lower authorities had erred in concluding that as the […]
