The Department further initiated penalty proceedings against the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on ground that the assessee failed to offer explanation for making such a claim. It was noted that once the claim was rejected the onus was on the assessee to dislodge the revertible presumption of the claim of concealment of income. However, the tribunal deleted penalty by holding that merely because the claim is not accepted would not give rise to penalty proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had made a legal claim in a transparent manner. Whether such a claim is acceptable or not, is altogether a different matter, it said.
Directions be issued to all the District And Sessions Judges In the States of Punjab, Haryana and U.T. Chandigarh for directing the officials concerned to start capturing/ entering the Aadhar Number of the parties while entering the cases in CIS 2.0. The members of the Bar may be requested to provide the Aadhaar number for the aforesaid Purpose.
The question concerns the sale of used cars. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, does not directly deal with the sale of a motor vehicle, a movable property; but the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, does. The Motor Vehicles Act, though, deals with the procedure post-sale. Here, a motor vehicle dealer is dealing in used cars. Is its transaction a sale in the conventional sense attracting the sales tax, or a service—as an intermediary, agent, or broker—to the true owner attracting service tax? The question is simple, but the answer is not.
Mr Ganesh states that although at this stage he is not pressing for any ad interim directions, the requirement for compliance of the impugned ICDS would arise at the time filing of returns and therefore it is important that the petition be heard at an early date after completion of pleadings.
Petitioner is filing this Public Interest Litigation before this Hon’ble Court seeking recourse against the patently discriminatory and illegal treatment being meted out to the women of India by the unconstitutional and illegal imposition of a Goods and Services Tax at a high rate of 12% on sanitary napkins.
High Court has held that even if, the claim made by the assessee company does not form part of the original return or even the revised return, it could still be considered, if, the relevant material was available on record, either by the appellate authorities, (which includes both the CIT (A) and the Tribunal) by themselves, or on remand,
The balance sheet and profit and loss account of these persons discloses that these persons had sufficient funds in their accounts for investing in the shares of the Assessee. In view of these voluminous documentary evidence, only because those persons had not appeared before the Assessing Officer would not negate the case of the Assessee.
Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the State of Punjab and the State of Karnataka. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are the Excise & Taxation Commissioner and the Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority (ETO).
HC directs the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner to send WhatsApp message to the Chairman, Sri Anil Pratap Singh and Dr. Ram Jeet Singh Yadav, Secretary/the Election Officer on their mobile requesting them to appear before the Court today.
In this case Delhi High Court held that as of date there is no clarity on whether all legal services (not restricted to representational services) provided by legal practitioners and firms would be governed by the reverse charge mechanism.
