Central Government had, till date, not notified the documents that have to be carried by a transporter of the goods in the course of interstate movement. Under the said circumstances and finding that neither the State Legislature nor the State Government would have the power to make laws/rules to govern interstate movements of goods in the course of trade, and for the purposes of levy of tax, detention for the sole reason that the transportation was not accompanied by the prescribed documents under the IGST Act/CGST Act/CGST Rules, cannot be legally sustained.
High Court of Kerala recently declared that interest from loan given to sister concern cannot be set off against the interest paid by the assessee to his benkers for the purpose of eligible deduction under section 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act 1961.
The solitary common issue that arose in these appeals was with regard to the legality of dis-allowance of deduction made towards belated deposit of employees contribution of Provident Fund/Employees State Insurance. A reading of the order passed by the Tribunal shows that the first appellate authority confirmed the order of dis-allowance following the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.454/2014.
Order makes mention of the service of a notice to the company as also to the Director, who represents the company in this writ petition. The notice sent to the company was returned with the postal inscription ‘addressee left’, whereas the notice sent to the Director was duly received by him on 14.03.2017.
The petitioner the consignor of certain goods has approached this Court against the notice issued by the detaining authority under the CGST/SGST Act. After detention when verification was made, it was found that there was mis-classification as also under valuation.
whether the assessee, who made a self assessment of tax and paid tax, far in excess of that determined under the regular assessment; is entitled to interest on the refund.
A division bench of the Kerala High Court recently held that a mere reduction in the shares of one partner, resulting in proportionate increase of shares of another partner would constitute a gift for the purpose of taxation under Section 4 (1) (a) of the Income Tax Act.
All these, provisions of agreement would, therefore, indicate that license that has been granted is that of a fully established running hotel authorizing the licensee to operate the hotel for a specified period subject to the terms and conditions incorporated therein.
It is not open to the Appellate Commissioner to introduce in the Assessment a new source of income and the assessment must be confined to those items of income which were the subject-matter of the original assessment.
CIT Vs M/s Mata Amrithandamayi Mata (Kerala High Court) A reading of Section 11 shows that subject to the provisions of Sections 62 and 63, the incomes enumerated therein shall not be included in the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt of the income. The person in receipt of the […]
