A person is exempted from the requirement of registration if he is engaged in supplying only those goods and services which are exempt from registration and does not supply any other goods or services. If such a person deals in any other goods or services, he will not be eligible for such exemption.
No. 1 World Wide Express Pvt Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) In the present case there was a reference to a unilateral declaration of liability by the petitioner and not a quantification of demand by the Revenue in the letter/notice dated 20.11.2018 and therefore, the same does not make the petitioner eligible […]
Rules 3(2)(b) and 4(2)(c) of the Rules of 2020 prescribing a minimum experience of not less than 20 years for appointment of President and Members of State Commission and experience of not less than 15 years for appointment of Presidents and Members of District Commission, are unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
P. K. Bhawmick Vs Abhratosh Mazumdar (Calcutta High Court) HC was not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the Settlement Commission in this Writ Petition and dismissed the same for the following reasons: i) Petitioner/Income Tax authorities have failed to make out any case in this Writ Petition that the learned Settlement Commission […]
Newslaundry Media Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Director General of Income Tax (Delhi High Court) Mr. Digvijay Singh, DDIT (Investigation), states that the seized material is in safe custody of the Income Tax Department and it shall be used for the purposes of investigation and in accordance with law. Mr. Sharma, assures and undertakes to this […]
Rocky Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Joint Commissioner of GST & CE (In situ) (Madras High Court) The larger issue agitated by the petitioner relates to its entitlement for refund on the ground that excess tax has been paid by it, there are two issues that arise for separate determination. The first relates to whether there […]
I am prima facie satisfied that there is non-application of mind to the purport of power exercisable by the second respondent under Section 83 of the CGST Act. In this context, I also bear in mind that the crippling effect an order of provisional attachment, on the bank accounts of a running establishment can have. Petitioner asserts that it is a running establishment and the annual audited reports, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P8 shows that the petitioner is a running establishment
High Court had refused to quash a FIR registered against a 47 years old entrepreneur, allegedly involved in illegally selling aadhaar cards as issuance of Aadhaar cards by agencies who were not empowered could also lead to the distribution of cards to neighboring countries which was against the interest of national security. It was prudent for the Government of India or the State Government to have a vigil on such instances of rising cases of frauds in Aadhaar enrollment.
Ashok Kumar Agarwal Vs Union of India and 2 Others (Allahabad High Court) Ashok Kumar Agarwal (the Petitioner) had filed a Petition to challenge the initiation of re-assessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the IT Act) for different Assessment Years (AYs). The Petitioners contended that all the impugned re-assessment proceedings had […]
Completed assessments could be interfered with by AO while making the assessment under Section 153 A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. No addition could be made under Section 153A as the cases of respondents were of non-abated assessments.
