Though the petitioner has sought for multiple reliefs, it is clear that they have confined their relief for refund of the amount of Rs.2.50 crores collected, while keeping open the other contentions in light of pending adjudication initiated by issuance of show cause notice.
Once the State Government had extended the benefit under the particular scheme, the same could not be withdrawn by the Electricity Department basing on the audit report. In absence of any evidence of theft being committed by assessee, the benefit of Intensive Policy could not be withdrawn.
Kerala High Court held that TDS never deducted and entire amount of TDS was paid along with penal interest hence initiation of prosecution under section 276B of the Income Tax Act unjustified. Accordingly, all the proceedings quashed.
Portion attributable to utilisation for import of assets into India must be capitalised under Section 43A, while the portion attributable to utilisation for acquiring assets from within India must be treated as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act.
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the non-functionality of the TRACES Portal shall not be grounds for denying the benefit arising out of the statutory provision under the Income Tax Act.
The petitioner was principally aggrieved by the impugned order dated 20 December 2023 which created a demand for the period 01 July 2017 to 25 July 2018 in respect of non-payment of IGST on reinsurance services.
The Revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 260A the Income Tax Act, 1961 impugning an order dated 05.01.2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.185/Del/2023 in respect of the assessment year 2013-14.
Calcutta HC restores GST registration on condition of paying tax, interest, and penalties for non-filing of returns. The petitioner’s appeal was initially time-barred.
Kerala High Court held that the “interest income” on the short-term deposits of the funds infused by the Government are in the nature of “capital receipt” and not “revenue receipt” and hence the same are not taxable as ‘income from other sources’.
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that it is settled law that for the fault of the counsel, the litigant should not be made to suffer. Thus, petition allowed with a suggestion to counsel for the applicant to invest one hour of community service while visiting Mercy Home.
