State Bank Of India Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) It is submitted that in this case, the Assessing Officer while passing the regular assessment orders had overlooked and/or ignored this particular claim. It is submitted that it is not a case of change of opinion as neither the assessment order referred to allowing of this […]
Imposition of interest is justified under sections 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, save and except on the income which arises from retrospective operation of any statute, decision etc.
Saji S. Vs. Commissioner, State GST Department (Kerala High Court at Ernakulam) The petitioner, who is the consignee and transporter, insists that the consignor paid the tax and penalty under that only based on the ASTO’s directions. But the fact remains that the remittance must have been under the head ‘IGST’. So the authorities have […]
Proper officer was directed to duly complete the pending adjudication provided under section 129 of Kerala GST Act, 2017 and was also directed that if assessee had complied with rule 140(1) of the Kerala GST Rules, 2017, the goods detained shall be released to it.
Hitech Outsourcing Services Vs CIT (Gujarat High Court) We have noticed that the Assessing Officer in teh original assessment proceedings had examined the assessee’s claim of deduction under section 10B of the Act. It is not as if such claim went unnoticed or unscrutinized. He wanted to be specific about the assessee’s claim for deduction […]
CIT Vs Society for Indian Automobile Manufactures (Delhi High Court) Ministry had sanctioned Rs.1,474.10 lacs ( including cost of land) for setting up Model Inspection & Certification Centres. The respondent/assessee was to execute this project for and on behalf of the Ministry. The amount received was in form of a financial sanction and not a […]
Abhay Traders Vs. State of U.P. & Ors (Allahabad High Court) The goods of the petitioner in transportation along with the vehicle was seized under section 129 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on 2-6-2018 for the reason that they were not accompanied by the E-way bill. The submission of learned […]
Religious institutions like temples, churches, mosques, which were not financed/funded by government did not fall within the purview of Right to Information Act, 2005. However, it is desirable to amend the Act at least to bring in its fold all the registered temples/institutions having income over and above a particular limit, to furnish information so as to have a greater vigil with respect to utilization of the monies, conducting affairs transparently and to achieve the objects of the RTI Act.
Suresh Kumar Singhal Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) Provision incorporated in the Constitution Act, 2016 as aforesaid, in no manner, restrict the operation of the provisions of section 174(2) incorporated in CGST Act beyond the period of one year, which provides that repeal of the Acts specified in sub-section (1) of section 174 […]
Explore the Apar Industries vs UOI case on GST refund interest. Petition challenges non-payment of interest on granted refund. High Court directs adjudication. Key details here.
