Rainbow Stones Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court) Under Section 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017, it is provided that, every claim for refund filed by any person before, on or after the appointed day (i.e. 01.07.2017), for refund of any amount of CENVAT credit, duty, tax, interest or any other amount paid […]
On a review, it has been decided to permit banks to reckon Government securities as Level 1 HQLA under FALLCR within the mandatory SLR requirement up to 16 per cent of their NDTL. Accordingly, the total HQLA carve out from the mandatory SLR, which can be reckoned for meeting LCR requirement will be 18 per cent of NDTL (2 per cent MSF plus 16 per cent FALLCR).
Both the petitioner and the respondent admit that as on date the above said address has been included in the petitioner’s place of business in the GST Registration. Thus, there is a post facto inclusion of the address, which was mentioned in the tax invoice raised by the supplier and in the E-way Bill.
Gammon India Limited Vs Sales Tax Officer (Calcutta High Court) Black’s Law Dictionary defines the word ‘set aside’ to mean annul or vacate. Thus, the word ‘setting aside’ used in clause (a) of the said Regulation necessarily means that a party to a proceeding before the tribunal can file a miscellaneous application praying for annulment […]
Green Valley Industries Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & CX (CESTAT Kolkata) The brief facts related to the case at hand are that the Appellant had succeeded in its appeal before this Tribunal vide FO 75527/2020 dated 22/10/2020 which had resulted in refund of Rs.78,16,265/-which was deposited by the Appellant during the investigation proceedings before […]
Arjun Chemicals Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai) The ld. Senior DR stated that the assessee has not elaborated how the assessee’s health condition was not viable for filing of appeal or there is no supporting evidence for the reason that the assessee’s health condition was not proper. Hence, he stated that the delay of […]
Neno Crystal Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Mumbai) It would not be inappropriate to mention here that the Appellant’s case is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Commissioner of Customs (Sea), Chennai-I Vs. M.R. Associates cited supra wherein it was clearly held that enhancement of value based on voluntary statement […]
Tax Revenues in India Mark a Record High in a Post-Pandemic Economy FY 2021-22 revenue Rs. 27 Lakh Crore; up 34% over Previous Year Slew of Measures such as Ease of Filing ITR, Faceless e-Assessment, new AIS & GST reforms Boosting Compliance & Fueling Tax Collection As a remarkable testimony to the rapid recovery of […]
Supreme Court has held that the expression ‘reason to believe’ means that there is some prima facie material on the basis of which the Department can reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at the stage of issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act.
St. Francis De Sales Church Trust Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) On a perusal of order of Ld.CIT (A) we find that the Ld.CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee, as un-admitted being not satisfied with the reasons adduced by the assessee for delay of 41 months in filing the appeal. The assessee explained that “It […]
