Lapse of unutilised input tax credit on account of inverted duty rate structure unlawful as held by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Shabnam Petrofils Pvt. Ltd Vs Union of India. Legal Provisions Section 54(3) of CGST Act, 2017 provides for refund of unutilised input tax credit in following 2 circumstances Zero rated […]
Pr. CIT Vs Harsha Engineerings Ltd. (Gujarat High Court) Section 14A of the Act can be invoked only if the assessee seeks to square off the expenditure against the income which does not form the part of the total income under the Act and in such circumstances, section 14A of the Act could not have […]
The CGST Act itself provides for the lapsing of the ITC at Sections 17(4) and 18(4) respectively of the CGST Thus, where the legislature wanted the ITC to lapse, it has been expressly provided for in the Act itself. No such express provision has been made in Section 54(3) of the CGST Act.
The issue under consideration is if Assessee remained absent on more than one occasions and appeal decided on merits then whether it will be called as Ex-parte order?
Where non-resident agents appointed by assessee for procuring export orders did not have permanent establishment in India and their activities as commission agents are being carried out outside India, merely because a portion of the sale to the overseas purchasers took place in India, would not make assessee liable to deduct tax at source under section 195.
Once an agreement to sell is executed in favour of some person, the said person gets a right to get the property transferred in his favour and, consequently, some right of the vendor is extinguished. Therefore, the agreement to sell which had been executed on 13th August 2010 was considered as the date on which the property, i.e. the agricultural land, had been transferred instead of 3rd July 2012 on which the sale-deed came to be executed and assessee was entitled to claim the benefit of section 54F as it had invested in purchase of residential house on 22nd April 2010 which was within the prescribed time limit.
Notice under section 143(2) was issued prior to the filing of the return of income which was invalid and the assessment order passed would also be invalid.
Allahabad High Court has held that tax liability cannot be fixed on the transporter merely because the assessee/transporter did not furnish the details of the consignor and the consignee of the completed transactions.
Maulikkumar Vinodkumar Patel Vs TRO (Gujarat High Court) In this case it was held that TRO has powers to order personal summons, Penadancy of recovery proceedings before TRO entitles invoking of Section 131, Requirement of Rule 83 of Schedule II and S. 131 requiring attendance of witness gets fulfilled when assesse appears before TRO. Absence […]
Saraf Natural Stone Vs UOI (Gujarat High Court) After implementation of GST, refund on exports got substantially delayed to most of the exporters resulting into blockage of working capital and harming the business of exporter community. In a recent Judgement delivered by The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Matter of M/s. Saraf Natural Stone Vs […]
