Pr. CIT Vs Suzlon Energy Limited (Gujarat High Court) Where assessee had debited unrealized loss due to foreign exchange fluctuation in foreign currency transaction on revenue items to its profit and loss account on the last date of accounting year, the same should be allowed as deduction under section 37(1). FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH […]
PCIT Vs M/s. Mohommad Haji Adam & Co. (Bombay High Court) In the present case, as noted above, the assessee was a trader of fabrics. The A.O. found three entities who were indulging in bogus billing activities. A.O. found that the purchases made by the assessee from these entities were bogus. This being a finding […]
Bhargava Motors Vs UOI (Delhi High Court) In the present case also the Court is satisfied that the Petitioner‟s difficulty in filling up a correct credit amount in the TRAN-1 form is a genuine one which should not preclude him from having his claim examined by the authorities in accordance with law. A direction is […]
The goods and the vehicle of the petitioner have been seized as the date of the tax invoice mentioned in the E-WAY bill was different from the date mentioned on the tax invoice.
In the High Court of Delhi in case of ON QUEST MERCHANDISING INDIA PVT. LTD. Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI. Held Section 9(2)(g) of Delhi Vat Act, 2004 requiring that the ITC will be allowed subject to the payment of tax by the selling dealer. Held that it was violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India. Purchasing Dealer has paid the entire tax amount to the selling dealer
Department was not justified in cancelling the certificate of entitlement of assessee-company and denying refund of tax paid on purchase of raw material and intermediate products as since the date when the actual production started, assessee did not have the eligibility certificate, they continued to discharge tax liability as a normal dealer and claimed input tax credit by adjusting the same against output tax liability and on account of retrospective grant of eligibility certificate, assessee became liable for full amount of output tax liability, therefore, the department was directed to work out the amount of refund that assessee would be entitled to and adjust the same towards outstanding dues.
Assets received by the retiring partners of a firm through family arrangement did not amount to ‘transfer’ for the purpose of imposing capital gain, and therefore, the reconstitution of firm would not attract Section 45(4).
Sonka Publication (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) In this case, a question to be asked is whether the books in question merely help the child in improving the child‘s handwriting by providing space in a book by copying from a written text or does it pose questions to […]
It is directed that the Respondents shall not, without prior intimation to this Court, proceed to appoint persons to the GST Appellate Tribunal till the next date.
Laying of underground cable by the mobile service provider is exigible to property tax being a levy for use of land for laying of cable and not on cable itself.
