Observing that the provisions in the Customs Act were silent about demurrage, the High Court held that it is beyond the legislative powers to include demurrage charges in the rules for Customs valuation. Supreme Court judgements in Wipro ltd, Essar Steel Ltd. and Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. were relied on.
Pramod Behera Construction Vs Commissioner of State Tax (Orissa High Court) We find that although under the GST regime all applications required to be done online. in the event any dealer faces any problem in uploading such data, the Commissioner ought to place alternative authority with the Sales Tax Officer or appropriate officer before whom […]
Where properties attached by Tax Recovery Officer (TRO) had already been subjected to recovery proceedings by a secured creditor under SARFAESI Act, 2002, the attachment order was quashed in view of section 35 of SARFAESI Act which makes it clear that the Act would override other laws and would have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force.
Ballasts or boulders or chips being mineral as per Entry 117 of the taxable list are exigible to tax at the rate of 4% of taxable list. Moreover, the appeal has been purportedly filed before the Tribunal with proper perspective and there is no defect in raising any such plea before it.
The fact in the instant case is that the assessee has submitted its return, which was assessed, but subsequently it was found that there is some suppression in submission of return so far as it relates to gross turn-over of the assessee and as such, reassessment order has been directed to be initiated under the provisions of Section 12(8) of the Act.
Commnr.,Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Vs Sanket Communications Pvt. Ltd. (Orissa High Court) Heard Mr.P.Mohapatra, learned Standing counsel for the Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party. Petitioners have filed this application to review/modification of the order dated 15.12.2016 passed in W.P.(C) No. 21861 […]
Hon’ble Odisha High Court has granted stay on the recovery of Late fee charged Under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act,1961. In Separate cases Hon’ble Bombay, Rajashthan, Kerala and Karnataka High Court has already stayed the Recovery Proceeding U/s. 234E of the Income Tax Act,1961 till the final verdict in the case.
Section 132(1)(iii) empowers the authorized officer to seize any such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing found as a result of such search which represent either wholly or partly undisclosed income or property of the person. However, the proviso carves out an exception.
Department cannot take advantage of its own inaction and lapses by taking a stand that the financial year is over. Such action of the opposite parties as rightly apprehended by the petitioner would lead to unnecessary complication and unavoidable and inappropriate proceedings. Had the certificate been given in time as was done in the previous year there would not have been any necessity for making any deduction of tax by some of the principals from the payments made to the petitioner and the ultimate consequence, because of Departmental inaction, the Assessee-petitioner has to again go through the process of seeking refund in its assessment.
There is no material evidence on record to show that the assessee had produced any reconciliation statement of interest and contractual receipts as per TDS certificate compared to turnover credited in the P & L Account as per the audited statement. In view of the provisions of Section 237 of the Income Tax Act and averments made in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the counter affidavit, it cannot be said that there is any laches on the part of opp. parties-Department in not granting refund to the petitioner as claimed in its return.
