Only a land in which the building is completely constructed stands excluded under the exclusionary provision under Explanation (1 )(b)(ii) of Section 2(ea) of Wealth Tax Act, 1957
M/s. Popular Vehicles & Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (Kerala High Court) Sub-clause (va) of Section 36(1) takes care of the employee’s contribution, which stands unaffected by Section 43B as the restriction available in Section 43B is already available under the Explanation to the said clause, with a qualification of the payment being before the […]
Naga Distributors Vs. UOI & Ors. (Kerala High Court) High Court held that If the uploading of FORM GST TRAN-1 is not possible for reasons not attributable to the petitioner, the authority will also enable him to take credit of the input tax available at the time of migration. FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT […]
If the petitioner applies within two weeks after receiving this judgment, the Nodal Officer will consider and take steps within a week thereafter. If the uploading of FORM GST TRAN-1 is not possible for reasons not attributable to the petitioner, the authority will also enable him to take credit of the input tax available at the time of migration.
Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Kerala High Court) Rule 9B(5) starts with a non-obstante Under the said rule, it is laid down that deduction under Rule 9B shall not be allowed unless the distributor credits in the books of accounts, the amounts realised by the distributor in case where the distributor himself has exhibited […]
When such extraction of toddy is carried on from the trees belonging to the members of the Society, it is definitely an agricultural produce grown by its members. Vending of such produce grown by its members even under a regulatory regime would be marketing of an agricultural produce.
It is seen that an identical matter has been disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 1802 of 2017, directing expeditious completion of the adjudication of the matter and permitting release of the goods detained pending adjudication, in terms of rule 140(1) of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
Berger Paints India Ltd. Vs Assistant State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court) Writ petition is disposed of directing the competent authority to complete the adjudication provided for under Section 129 of the statutes referred to above, within a week from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. It is also directed that […]
Seyadu Beedi Company Vs Asstt. Tax Officer (Intelligence), State Tax Officer (Intelligence) & Ors. (High Court Kerala) An identical matter has been disposed in W.A.No.1802 of 2017, directing expeditious completion of the adjudication of the matter and permitting release of the goods detained pending adjudication, in terms of Rule 140(1) of the Kerala Goods and […]
Declaration made by the petitioner under the Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 has been rejected in terms of the order impugned in the writ petition on the ground that they have not submitted the amended declaration in accordance with the procedure prescribed in Circular No. 170/5/2013-ST dated 8.8.2013. As per the said circular, in a […]
