CIT Vs. Ms Flytxt Technology P. Ltd. (Kerala High Court) Admittedly, the assessee initially claimed the benefit of Section 10B which was allowed by the Assessing Officer. Only when the Commissioner was seized of the proceedings under Section 263, the assessee raised an alternative claim for the benefit of Section 10A. The Commissioner did not […]
The petitioner is aggrieved with the detention of goods at Exhibit P4. The goods are granite purchased by the petitioner from Tami Nadu and transported to Karamana at Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner submits that the transport is effected for the purpose of building a residential house; the permit of which is produced at Exhibit P1 and the plan at Exhibit P2
Madhu M.B vs The Commercial Tax Officer (Kerala High Court)- It was held that where as the statutory provisions in relation to search, seizure, detention and release thereof is provided under section 129 of CGST Act, 2017, the Department cannot deviate from the said provisions in order to pass an order which is against such provisions contained in the Act.
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the interest paid on money borrowed to bring into existence a show room (according to the revenue an income earning apparatus) is a revenue expenditure?
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,
In Stock point Share Services Private Ltd v. ACIT, Justices Antony Dominic and Dama Seshadri Naidu of Kerala High Court held that in order claim deduction in respect to bad debts under section Section 36(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, the assessee has to fulfill two conditions, i.e, (i) the bad debt has been written off and (ii) that the bad debt has been taken into account in computing the income of the assessee in the previous years.
The respondent herein, a dealer registered under the KVAT Act and migrated to CGST Act, had purchased a consignment of plywoods from a manufacturer at Perumbavoor, and was transporting the same. The goods were detained by the appellants and Ext.P5 notice under Section 129(3) of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was issued.
Synthite Industrial Ltd. Vs CIT (Kerala High Court) Admittedly, the assessee purchased the land which was a rubber estate. The land was purchased to utilize it for the non-agricultural purpose of expansion of its factory. The rubber trees in the land were slaughter tapped which is a process that immediately precedes the cutting and removal […]
These Income Tax appeals are filed by the Revenue aggrieved by the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench allowing I.T.A. Nos. 428 & 429 of 2002 filed by the respondent/assessee concerning the assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99.
Writ Petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be pleased to issue an interim order, directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to file IT returns through e-filing or through Manual Filing without insisting on Aadhar number / Enrollment No., pending […]
