Whether Rajasthan Tax Board was justified in law in holding that respondent cannot be hold responsible for amount not deposited by selling dealer and allowed benefit of Input Tax Credit which ultimately will amount to double jeopardy to State as selling dealer has not deposited tax whereas subsequent dealer has claimed benefit of Input Tax Credit.
Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner had created the fake seven firms and claimed input tax credit of Rs.16,99,89,923 (Sixteen Crores Ninety Nine lacs Eighty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Three).
As per clause (b) of Section 130-E of the Act, an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court against an order passed by the Appellate Tribunal which relates among other things to the determination of any question having relation to rate of duty of customs or to the value of goods for the purpose of assessment.
Regulation 72(1) provides that an officer or employee shall be eligible for payment of gratuity either as per the provisions of the Act of 1972 or as per Sub-regulation (2) whichever is higher. Thus, it is beyond doubt that an employee must receive gratuity whichever is more beneficial either under the Act of 1972 or under the Regulations framed by the bank. However, this is not the same thing as to suggest that an employee can choose computation of gratuity under one statute and seek benefits of other provisions under another statute. As we have noticed, the scheme of gratuity under the Act of 1972 and under the regulations framed by the bank are different.
High Court has held that the service tax paid on re-insurance would be allowable as input service under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
Sudesh Taneja Vs ITO (Rajasthan High Court) In the writ petitions the petitioners have challenged respective notices issued by the Assessing Officers under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) for reopening assessments for various assessment years. All these notices have been issued after 01.04.2021 and pertain to relevant period […]
Rajasthan High Court upheld the provisions w.r.t claiming of refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) and asked the department to pass final order after taking into account the reply of the assessee.
LNJ Power Ventures Ltd. Vs Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (Rajasthan High Court) a) Exercise of jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is no doubt discretionary, but the discretion must be exercised on sound judicial principles. (b) High Courts while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution […]
Tax Bar Association Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur) This public interest petition has been filed by the Tax Bar Association of Jodhpur pointing out various difficulties faced by the assessees on account of the official portal of the income tax department having various glitches. The first and the primary prayer made by […]
CIT Vs Manna Trust (Rajasthan High Court) The respondent Trust is a registered charitable trust. The assessing officer for the assessment year 2016-17 accepted the return filed by the trust and granted exemption as applicable under law. The Commissioner, Income-Tax took the said order in revision under Section 263 of the Act and held that […]
