A.G. Ferro Cast P Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) A perusal of the assessment order reveals that the order of the Assessing Officer is short and cryptic wherein no reasoning has been given as to why the Assessing Officer has treated the share application/share premium received from one party M/s Lagan Vincom Pvt. Ltd. as […]
Mundkar Madhavaraya Prabhu Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court) Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, having regard to the availability of equally efficacious and alternative remedy by way of appeal before the First Appellate Authority, without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of […]
Godrej Consumer Products Limited Vs Union of India (Jammu & Kashmir High Court) In the present case, impugned Notifications are lucid and eloquent and need not be interpreted or construed in the way and manner the petitioner intends and chooses to and as a result whereof, writ petition qua impugned Notifications is liable to be […]
In re Shreejikrupa Project Limited (GST AAR Chhattisgarh) Applicability of GST rate of 12% on receipt of contract for new construction of CBD railway station, platform, parking, building and all other civil construction within the boundary of station as per entry no.3 (V) of Notification No.11/2017 – Central tax (Rate) dated .28.06.2017. Here in the […]
Mobile Store Limited Vs Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes (Calcutta High Court) 1. This intra-Court appeal by the writ petitioner is directed against the order dated 29th November, 2022 in W.P.A. 23900 of 2022. The said writ petition was filed by the appellant praying for a direction upon the respondents to refund the amount of excess […]
Vodafone Mauritius Limited Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) Ms Fereshte D. Sethna, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that the principal allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, which is a foreign company incorporated under the laws of Mauritius, had sold shares worth Rs.1295 crores, of an Indian company going by the […]
Kailash Kedia Vs ITO (Orissa High Court) Learned counsel for the Petitioners have also assailed both the notice under Section 148-A(1)(b) of the Act as well as the consequential order under Section 148-A(1)(d) on several grounds including the ground of limitation, not considering the objections filed, not providing a personal hearing, non-application of mind to […]
Cinepolis India Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Mumbai) These appeals of M/s Cinepolis India Pvt Ltd, against order-in-original no. MUM/CGST/MW/COMMR/AK/42-43/2020-21 dated 26th February 2021 of Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai West, arise from the unique deployment of constituents, that make up channel entities involved in exhibition of cinematographic films, in an arrangement by which […]
Messrs Dic Fine Chemicals Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.E (CESTAT Ahmedabad) As regard the issue that whether the refund claim can be rejected on the ground that the input services on which the refund claim was made by SEZ is not approved by the approval committee. As per the facts of the present case the refund […]
Motiprabha Infratech Pvt. Ltd Vs Union of India (Patna High Court) Undisputedly, minimum statutory period of 30 days mandated under the provisions of Section 74(A) of CGST/BGST Act, 2017 was not afforded to the petitioner for making payment due and prior to the expiry of 30 days, the assessing officer proceeded to pass the order, […]