CESTAT clarifies service tax demands cannot be based solely on ITR or 26AS statements. The department must prove service provision, recipient, and consideration. This decision upholds consistent rulings and protects businesses from unsubstantiated demands.
CESTAT Chennai rules redemption fine cannot exceed market value in Vinayaga Traders vs Commissioner of Customs case, setting precedent for import disputes.
Discover why the AAR cannot issue rulings on matters outside CGST Act 2017, Section 97(2), through the case of Srinivasa Constructions India Pvt. Ltd.
Dive into the details of Changejar Technologies Pvt. Ltd’s GST AAR in Karnataka. Learn about their classification as an e-commerce operator, tax obligations, and more.
Kerala High Court quashes an Income Tax assessment order against We Connect Agencies for not providing a hearing, emphasizing fair trial rights.
Explore the Delhi High Court judgment in CIT Vs S.A. Chitra Ventures Ltd. Understand the limitations on AO’s jurisdiction without income variation in draft assessment orders.
Read the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Delhi Polymers Vs Commissioner regarding retrospective cancellation of GST registration and the directive for cancellation from the issuance date of the Show Cause Notice.
The company and its directors have been penalized for not having a registered office for over 1000 days, violating the Companies Act. This case highlights the importance of companies maintaining a registered office.
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has penalized Pacelife Marketing Private Limited for failing to file its financial statements for three financial years. This order highlights the importance of companies complying with financial filing requirements.
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has imposed a penalty on Pacelife Marketing Private Limited for failing to file annual returns for three financial years. This order serves as a reminder to companies of their obligation to file annual returns and the consequences of non-compliance.
