We have perused the relevant documents, namely, Invoice, Goods receipt, E-way Bills etc., which are enclosed as Annexures to the writ petition and found that the E-way bill under the UPGST Act has been downloaded by the petitioner, much before the detention and seizure of the goods and the vehicle, disclosing all the necessary informations.
The other ground of seizure on which penalty has been imposed is that the goods, started their journey one week after the date of the invoice. Prima facie that cannot be the ground to seize the goods or to impose penalty.
The goods of the petitioner have been seized on 16.03.2018 for want of E-Way Bill. On the respective submissions of the parties the issue which crops up in this petition is whether Rule 138 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) as it stood originally before the 4th amendment would stand revived with the rescinding of the notifications dated 30/31.01.2018 enforcing the amended Rule 138 of the Rules w.e.f. 01.02.2018 with regard to the E-Way Bill.
Where assessee had failed in establishing the creditworthiness of the donors, occasion for making the gifts and why the donors who were strangers and not men of means gifted such huge amounts to the assessee- HUF out of love and affection, therefore, addition made by AO was justified.
Bhim Rao Ambedkar Educational Society Vs. CIT (Exemption) (Allahabad High Court) A categorical finding has been recorded that Society is not being run according to the objects, i.e., free health education and establishment of dental college without fee. He also pointed out that a Society if charging nominal fee to maintain its expenses etc., it […]
Petitioner requests to extend the time period for filing of GST Tran-1 because his application was not entertained on the last date i.e. 27.12.2017 and he has filed his complete application for necessary transactional credit.
Admittedly, the mobile phone and charger are sold as part of a composite package. The primary intent of the contract appears to be the sale of the mobile phone and the supply of the charger at best collateral or connected to the sale of the mobile phone.
Hon’ble Allahabad High court has in the case of M/S Simbhauli Sugar Mills Ltd in ITA No 607 of 2011 has held that amendment is sec 43B is curative in nature and would apply retrospectively.
A division bench of the Allahabad High Court recently ruled that the provisions of deemed dividend would not attract in case of mere issuance of a cheque that was subsequently cancelled and returned. While quashing a departmental appeal against the order of ITAT, the bench clarified that payment of any sum is necessary to constitute deemed dividend for the purpose of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Allahabad High Court has directed GST Department to place on record the reasons for cancellation of GST registration without giving personal hearing and by keeping the same on GST website.
