When the CBDT circular refers to the amount sought to be evaded, it must be seen and understood in light of the provisions contained in section 276C(1) and in turn must be seen as amount sought to be evaded. 100% of tax sought to be evaded would be the basic compounding fees.
In the given case, petitioner is engaged in the business of trading of building material and other items in wholesale. Petitioner has applied for G.S.T.Number with the G.S.T.Authorities and is granted G.S.T.Number.
As per clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, it was provides that where a proper officer under Central Goods and Services Tax Act has initiated any proceedings on a subject matter, no proceedings shall be initiated by the proper officer under that Act on the same subject matter.
It is ordered that PAN of the applicant shall not be declared inoperative and the applicant would not be in default in any proceedings only for the reason that the permanent account number is not linked with Aadhaar or Aadhaar number is not quoted and the applicant shall not be subjected to the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 139AA of the Act till the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Ltd. and others in Civil Application No.8588 of 2019 is delivered and available. Rule is made absolute accordingly to the aforesaid extent.
Gujarat High Court allows release of the conveyance confiscated by the GST department under section 130 of the CGST Act upon depositing a sum of Rs.60,795/- by way of fine.
The issue under consideration is whether the act of residing in the premises of the petitioner for 8 days in case of search is permissible under Act?
The Gujarat High Court set aside Reassessment Notice issued to the amalgamated company which ceased to exist after approval of the composite scheme of arrangement.
CIT (Exemptions) Vs Baroda Cricket Association (Gujarat High Court) 1. By this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the appellant Revenue has challenged the order dated 11.06.2019 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench ‘B’ in ITA No.2675/Ahd/2017 for assessment year 2014-15 by proposing the following three questions stated […]
Synergy Fertichem Pvt. Ltd Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) (i) Section 129 of the Act talks about detention, seizure and release of goods and conveyances in transit. On the other hand, Section 130 talks about confiscation of goods or conveyance and levy of tax, penalty and fine thereof. Although, both the sections start […]
Re-assessment even if in case where return was not scrutinized before the income chargeable to tax had escaped before acceptance originally could not be made unless AO has reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax had escaped, therefore, for mere verification or for fishing inquiry, reopening of assessment was not permissible.
