Onora Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Karnataka High Court) The issue under consideration is whether the prosecution of the petitioners for the offence punishable under section 276B of the Income Tax Act could be sustained without determination of the liability of the petitioners under section 201 of the Act? In the given case, it was […]
SRS Travels/Logistics Vs Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka High Court) Section 129 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 empowers detention and seizure of the vehicle that was used for transportation of goods in question and therefore, the order cannot be faltered. However, having argued the matter for some time resisting the […]
M/s. Kongovi Private Limited Vs. Union of India (Karnataka High Court) The petitioner was aggrieved by the action of the Revenue in not permitting it to correct an error which occurred when filing Form GST TRAN-1, due to which the eligible credit under the earlier indirect tax law could not be transferred to the electronic […]
Atria Convergence Technologies Ltd Vs Union of India (Karnataka High Court) The Rule 120A provides for revision of declaration. In the event of the registered person who had submitted a declaration electronically in FORM GST TRAN-1, intends to revise such declaration once, this provision can be invoked. This provision makes it clear that the revision […]
M/s. Atria Convergence Technologies Ltd Vs Union of India (Karnataka High Court) Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to revise or rectify the errors in the FORM GST TRAN-1 in terms of Rule 120A wherein the Commissioner is empowered to extend the time period specified in Rule 117. As the […]
Tribunal in exercise of its power under sub-section (2) of section 254 had rectified the mistake apparent on record and deleted the double addition of income in respect of assessee. Thereafter, Revenue again filed an application under sub-section (2) of section 254 seeking rectification of order passed under sub-section (2) of section 254.
Shree Enterprises Vs CTO (Karnataka High Court) Facts- Petitioners have challenged the order of confiscation as illegal, seeking all consequential reliefs. Petitioners are claiming to be the consignee and transporter of the goods in question. It is their contention that the Respondent has detained the goods and vehicle illegally for more than a month in […]
High Court in the case of assessee had held that by taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and punishment which was liable to be involved where assessee was indulged in issuing fake invoices without actual supply of goods with an intention to fraudulently avail the input tax credit, accused assessee’s were given anticipatory bail for the offence punishable under Section 137 of GST Act, 2017 subject to certain conditions.
Pragati Automotion (P.) Ltd. Vs Union of India (Karnataka High Court) The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioners to correct the bonafide error which has crept in while filing the GST Tran – 1 form because of which the petitioner is deprived of the transitional credit of […]
It was held that Amount received by assessee from his father out of sum received by father for transfer of mining lease right to a Company in which assessee was shareholder cannot be treated as deemed dividend income of the assessee under section 2(22)(e) as sum was not received on behalf of Assessee and it was for a commercial transaction.
