South Yarra Holdings Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) It is a settled position in law that re-opening of an assessment has to be done by an Assessing Officer on his own satisfaction. It is not open to an Assessing Officer issue a reopening notice at the dictate and/or satisfaction of some other authority. Therefore, on […]
Avtar Trading Co. Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the opposite parties in most arbitrary and illegal manner have detained the vehicle as well as the goods. There is no contravention of the provisions and there is no evasion of tax. The driver of the vehicle was […]
In case, it is not possible to re-credit the amount to the Electronic Credit Ledger by the respondent revenue due to non-availability of mechanism at GSTN portal, the petitioner shall be permitted to manually take input tax credit of the amount of the refund rejected in Form GSTR-3B.
Pr. CIT Vs M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Assessing Officer sought clarification from the assessee about the correctness of the amount of onefifth of the total expenses incurred under Section 35D of the Act. The assessee under letter dated 26.10.2004 gave specific explanation on the issue raised by the Assessing Officer and thereafter, […]
There is nothing on the record to suggest that the assessee had other businesses or that the undisclosed receipts were assessee’s profit out of any other activity other than development of housing project, The Tribunal came to the specific conclusion that the unrecorded consideration was also part of the assessee’s sale transaction of completed residential units and was therefore eligible under Section 80IB [10] of the Act. We do not find any error in such view.
Lakshmi Card Clothing Mfg. Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) Facts of the case clearly show that the assessee did not make any claim for deduction under Section 80-I of the Act, for the relevant assessment year. Secondly, as pointed out by us in the preceding paragraph, while discussing about the applicability of […]
Mahendra Kumar Singhi Vs Commissioner of State Tax (High Court of Madras) Section 132 of the Act will apply with all force the moment an invoice or a bill is issued without, movement of goods or Input Tax Credit has been wrongly availed. In the present caser the preliminary investigation reveals that the entities have […]
Respondents are directed to open the portal before 31st of March 2019. In the event they do not do so, they will entertain the GST TRAN-1 of the petitioner manually and pass orders on it after due verification of the credits as claimed by the petitioner. They will also ensure that the petitioner is allowed to pay its taxes on the regular electronic system also which is being maintained for use of the credit likely to be considered for the petitioner.
Rimjhim Ispat Limited Vs State Of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Coming to the question of the validity of the confiscation order passed under Section 130 of the UPGST Act and challenged by the petitioner by means of an amendment application filed. The perusal of the said confiscation order (Annexure-10 to the writ petition) reveals that […]
Pranit Hem Desai Vs Additional Director General (Gujarat High Court) In the opinion of this court, when the communications dated 4.4.2019 of the Deputy Director, DGGI, AZU itself informs the petitioners that the petitioners have a remedy against the order of attachment by way of filing objection under sub-rule (5) of rule 159 of the […]
