GBT India Pvt. Ltd. Vs National E–Assessment Centre (ITAT Delhi) During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the bad debts are related to very brand conscious entities, which by no stretch of imagination can be made as bad debts. The Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee has not furnished […]
In re Rochem Separation Systems India Private Limited (GST AAR Maharashtra) Question 1: What is applicable rate of GST on supply of Reverse Osmosis Plant/system (RO Plant/system) to Indian Navy/lndian Coast Guard in normal course? Answer: – In view of the discussions made above, the applicable rate of GST is 18%. Question 2: What is […]
In re Chennai Water Desalination Limited (GST AAR Tamilnadu) 1. Supply of desalinated water by the applicant to CMWSSB for distribution as safe drinking water to public falls under the entry at SI.No.99 of notification No. 2/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017 and attracts ‘NIL’ rate of GST. 2. Transaction of supply of safe drinking water […]
In re Rotary District 3231 (GST AAR Tamilnadu) To sum up, the membership fees collected by the applicant from their Members is subject to tax as per Section 7 (1) (aa) of the GST Act as the activities rendered by the applicant to their Members is a supply to its constituents/members and they have to […]
In this case, we note that assessee is claiming exemption u/s. 80IC. The assessee has not filed return of income u/s. 139(1). As per the provisions of section80 AC it is mandatory for the assessee to file return of income u/s.139 (1) to be eligible to claim deduction u/s. 80-IA or 80-IB, or 80-IAB or 80-IC or 80-ID or 81-E. It is undisputed that assessee has not filed return of income under section 139 (1). Hence, as per the provisions of the act, the assessee is not entitled to claim the deduction.
In view of absence of documentary evidence, and the findings and discussion hereinabove, the Petitioner cannot be granted MEIS benefit merely on the basis of pleadings which are prima facie insufficient on the face of record. Hence the Petition must fail.
ICMAI Registered Valuers Organisation Vs CIT (E) (ITAT Delhi) From a bare reading of the impugned order under section 12AA of the Act, it appears that the assessee has failed to respond to the requirements of the CIT(E) to enable him to appreciate the relevant facts for the purposes of registration. However, in the same […]
Kamalesh Sen Vs Assistant State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court) It is noticed from Ext.P8, that the respondent has given a reason for initiating proceedings under Section 130. The correctness or otherwise of the said reason is not a matter which can be considered by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, […]
K.C. Marketing Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) Assessee has claimed various expenditure from its principal by way of reimbursement. The copies of relevant bills as well as credit notes issued by M/s Satnam Overseas Ltd. in favor of assessee has also been placed on page nos. 38 to 83 of paper-book. The statement of TDS deducted […]
Ram Avtar Bansal Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The assessee was asked to explain the source of cash deposited in the aforementioned bank accounts. In his reply, the assessee accepted that the gross receipts of Rs. 60,02,800/- belong to him and simultaneously submitted a revised return on 18/1/2015. The gross receipts were shown as income from […]
