Mr. Mittal points out that the calculation of the interest payable for delayed payment of GST as determined by the Respondent is erroneous. According to him, interest has been calculated even on the amount constituting the input tax credit which is in fact to be adjusted against the tax liability. He states that on the actual tax liability, interest has been paid by the Petitioner. He further states that against the total tax liability of Rs.3.31 crores the interest liability works out to 8.19 crores which makes it unreasonable and erroneous.
CIT Vs. State Bank of India (Bombay High Court) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law, in admitting the additional ground of appeal when the assessee had not raised this issue before the Assessment Officer or the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ? Tribunal has jurisdiction to […]
GST on goods supplied to and from Duty Free Shops is rightly conferred and the claims of any accumulated unutilized ITC are refundable to respondent.
Smt. D. Zeenath Vs ITO (Madras High Court) Conclusion: Assessee created mortgage after acquiring the property and clearing off of the mortgage debt prior to transfer of the property would not entitle her to claim deduction under section 48 as there was only a mere application by the owners themselves of the profits realized on […]
Sri Deepak Dhanaraj Vs ITO (Karnataka High Court) In this case AO has not whispered about the revised return filed by the assessee except observing that the returns filed by the assessee were invalidated being defective returns. If that being the position, no opportunity was provided to the petitioner under section 139(9) of the Act […]
Madhav Gopaldas Shah Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) 1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with File No. CCST/ADENF/FSU-7/MadhavArrest/2018-19/B.4 & AC/U-6/Arrest/2018-19/B.5811 of the office of the Chief Commissioner of State Tax, Flying Squad Unit-7, Gujarat State Ahmedabad […]
Orissa High Court in the case of M/s. Safari Retreats Private Limited vs. Chief Commissioner of CGST held that Credit on inputs/services used for construction of malls for the purpose of letting out is allowable.
Shantam Bose Vs. Union of India (Kerala High Court) After the initiation of proceedings the petitioner was promoted to the post of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as per order dated 12.1.2012. According to him, the factum of his promotion to higher post is indicative of the fact that the official respondents are not considering the charges […]
As per Rule 120A of the CGST Rules, 2017 application for extending the time period for submitting the revised FORM GST TRAN-1 electronically has to be extended by the Commissioner and not by any other subordinate authority.
Best Cybercity (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (Delhi High Court) In the present case all the material that was necessary for the AO to form an opinion regarding the transaction involving the Assessee and PACL was already available with the AO. There was no fresh tangible material on the basis of which the AO could […]
