The HC held that the impugned provisional attachment of the Petitioner’s bank account was in vogue till 27.05.2020. The communication/order dated 28.05.2019 ceased to operate with the effect from 27.05.2020. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 were directed to de- freeze the Petitioners’ bank account.
Gammon India Ltd Vs CST (CESTAT Mumbai) The Mumbai CESTAT, in Gammon India Ltd Vs. CST held that demand on Mobilization advance is not consistent with law and deserves to be set aside. Proviso to Section 2(31) of the CGST Act 2017 provides that deposits shall not be considered as payment made unless the supplier applies […]
In re Heritage foods limited (GST AAR Andhra Pradesh) What is the appropriate chapter under the customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) under which the product ‘Flavoured Milk’ can be classified as per the explanation (iv) of the Notification No.1/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June 2017? AAR held that it is a […]
Where assessee had received entire consideration and possession of the property was also handed over in the assessment year 2004-05, he would be exigible towards capital gain tax only for the assessment year 2004-05 and not for the assessment year 2007-08 when proper sale deed was executed and registered. Just because capital gain accrued to assessee has escaped tax in assessment year 2004-05, the same cannot be brought to tax subsequently in assessment year 2007-08, therefore, AO was directed to delete the addition made.
In re Jain Dairy Products Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Gujarat) Question-1: Whether the benefit of exemption of GST at 0% is applicable for the invoices raised to the end use users in case of selling of paneer in loose form without sealing of packet / in loose carry bags and bearing details like name of […]
In re Bhaveen Ramesh Shah Proprietor of M/s The Roll Company (GST AAR Gujarat) Question: What is the Classification as per HSN and rate of tax in terms of the Notification No.01/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended by the Notification No.18/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 26.07.2018 in respect of their products, (i) The Zip Roll […]
Lease Plan India Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) These appeals are against disallowance made by the learned assessing officer under section 40 (a)(i) on account of non-deduction of tax at source on guarantee commission paid to lease plan Corporation NV Netherland is confirmed holding it to be payment in nature of Fees For Technical […]
When the company got back its funds on the same day, it cannot fall into the definition of the deemed dividend.
ACIT Vs Emaar MGF Construction Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi) We find that the assessee is under the obligation to part away with the source of income to the holding company and it was not its volition alone, to give away the revenue that could have been otherwise accrued to them. An agreement entered into by […]
Payment orders if resubmitted is getting resubmitted successfully to GSTN. It is therefore requested that necessary instructions may be issued to the proper officers handling refunds under your Jurisdiction to resubmit the payment orders wherever the above-mentioned errors were noticed.
