The issue under consideration is whether the re-opening of assessment u/s 147 is justified if the details on the basis of which case is re-opened was already available at the time of original assessment?
Commissioner of Service Tax Vs Sobha Developers Ltd (Karnataka High Court) The issue under consideration is whether the principle of mutuality is applicable to services provided by the club to its members and does not amount to rendition of service from one person to another and would not be considered as taxable service for the […]
The assessee is a private limited company mainly engaged in the activity of running a football team. It filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-13 declaring Nil Income.
The issue to be decided is Whether the Appellant i.e. the service recipient could utilize Cenvat credit of Central Excise duty paid on inputs, for payment of service tax on services viz.Management, Maintenance or Repair, Copyright and Advertising, received by them from abroad, under reverse charge mechanism?
When no money, bullion, jewellery or book entry was found at the time of search, and only evidence against the assessee is an admission of additional income made in the statement under section 132(4), whether such admission tantamount to disclosure of money, bullion, jewellery or diary and income disclosed is to be considered as concealed income or not?
In the given case the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of builders and developers. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee had received hoarding charges of Rs. 41,80,000/- from M/s Dezen Products for advertising display on boundary walls and the same was offered for taxation under the head Income from House Property.
The issue under consideration is that whether Event Management Service, short term accommodation, storage and packing, Management, Maintenance & Repair, Business Auxiliary Service and Business Support Services these are considered as Input Service or not?
More-so, when clearance and supply of dutiable goods is accepted and there is no denial to the fact that a purchase order existed for supply of dutiable goods, on mere assumptions the intention cannot be determined or it can be concluded that the conduct was fraudulent.
High Court states that if bank guarantee is deposited within prescribed time, then the proceedings taken out under section 129(3) of GST Act shall stand concluded in view of the provisions of section 129(5).
Before penalizing the assessee by making him pay interest, the principles of natural justice ought to be complied with before making a demand for interest under sub section (1) of Section 50 of the GST Act. Consequence of demanding interest and non-payment thereof is very drastic.
