Notice under section 148 issued to a dead person could not be continued against the legal representatives and moreover, section 292B also could not be resorted to.
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 Vs Ankur Protein Industries Ltd. (Gujarat High Court) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in allowing carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation following Circular No. 14 of 2001 without appreciating that the amendment to the Finance Act was prospective? Current depreciation is deductible in the […]
M H Khanusiya Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) Levy of Entry Tax at the rate of 12.5% treating Excavators as motor vehicles and/or at par with the motor vehicles is hereby held to be illegal, discriminatory, violative of Article 304(a) of the Constitution of India and against the object and purpose of the […]
M/s. Hubergroup India Private Limited Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) Gujarat High Court has allowed a writ petition filed against denial of refund of Central Sales Tax (CST) to an EOU in a case when the inputs procured from the DTA were used in the production of goods cleared in the DTA during […]
Gayatri Enterprise Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court) Provisions of Section 50C of the Income Tax Act cannot be applied for the purpose of making addition under section 69B of the Act. We fail to understand why section 50C of the Act has been brought into play having regard to the facts of the present case. […]
The issue under consideration is whether the re-opening of the assessment u/s 147 based on information from investigation report is justified in law?
Pr. CIT Vs Gujarat State Petronet Limited (Gujarat High Court) The language of Section 14A of the Act is plain and clear. Before invoking Rule 8D, the Assessing Officer is obliged to indicate that having regard to the accounts of the assessee, he is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee […]
The powers of arrest under Section 69 of the Act, 2017 are to be exercised with lot of care and circumspection. Prosecution should normally be launched only after the adjudication is completed.
When the commission paid to the non-resident agents was neither received or deemed to be received in India nor accrued or was deemed to accrue in India, no income was chargeable to tax under the provisions of the Act. When the payment made by assessee to the overseas agent for services rendered abroad was not income chargeable to tax in India, there was no obligation cast upon assessee to deduct tax at source under section 195 and consequently, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) would not be attracted.
Gujarat High Court has reiterated that the power to arrest under Section 69 of the Central GST Act is to be exercised with lot of care and circumspection and that prosecution should normally be launched only after completion of adjudication. The Court directed that no coercive steps of arrest against the writ petitioner should be taken.
