Charter Party Agreement making available the services of vessel by assessee-company to Port trust would tantamount to a deemed sale as there was a transfer of right to use the vessel as provided in Article 366(29A)(d) read with section 5C or section 2(j) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. Thus, the transaction was liable to be taxed by the concerned authorities in the State of Karnataka.
P. Singaravelan & Ors. Vs The District Collector Tiruppur and DT & Ors (Supreme Court) It is useful to recall that it is well-settled that the dismissal of an SLP against an order or judgment of a lower forum is not an affirmation of the same. If such an order of this Court is non-speaking, […]
University of Delhi Vs Union of India & Ors. (Supreme Court) From a consideration of the view taken by this Court through the decisions cited supra the position is clear that, by and large, a liberal approach is to be taken in the matter of condonation of delay. The consideration for condonation of delay would […]
H.S. Ramchandra Rao Vs CIT (Supreme Court) Amount received by assessee for relinquishing secretaryship of educational society cannot be treated as a capital receipt. The substance of the admission is that the appellant was holding the post of Secretary of the Institution [Paramahamsa Foundation (R) Trust] until 1996 but he left the institution after new […]
Bombay HC held that in case, the deductor has failed to upheld the correct details in form 26AS the benefit should be given to the assesssee on the basis of evidence produced before the Department.
In response to Appeal Filed by Central Government against the Gujarat High Court Judgment in the case of AAP And Co. Vs Union of India, Hon’ble Supreme Court stays the Gujarat HC judgement which states that GSTR-3B is not a return under Section 39 of Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.
Genpact India Private Limited Vs DCIT (Supreme Court) Section 115QA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 stipulates that in case of buy back of shares referred to in the provisions of said Section, the company shall be liable to pay additional income tax at the rate of 20% on the distributed income. Any determination in […]
Notice under section 143(2) under which jurisdiction was assumed by AO was issued to a non-existent company. The assessment order was also issued against amalgamating company. This was a substantive illegality and not a procedural violation of the nature adverted to in section 292B. Accordingly, assessment order framed in the name of non-existing person was void ab initio.
Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT (Supreme Court) Condonation of delay in filing appeal(s) against common order dated 29.12.2003 passed by Income Tax Appellate Authority being barred by 1754 days.: If the stand of the Applicant in the Affidavit that he had no knowledge about the passing of the order is not expressly refuted by […]
Rojer Mathew Vs South Indian Bank Ltd. & Ors. (Supreme Court) 1. Leave granted. BRIEF BACKGROUND: 2. In the present batch of cases, the constitutionality of Part XIV of the Finance Act, 2017 and of the rules framed in consonance has been assailed. While it would be repetitious to reproduce the pleadings of each case […]
