Goods and Services Tax : Detailed clarifications on GST Amnesty Scheme under Section 128A and Rule 164 of CGST Rules, covering waivers, application process...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras HC rules failure to register under GST law constitutes deliberate tax evasion. Case highlights tax liability, penalties, an...
Goods and Services Tax : Bombay HC ruled that GST refund deficiencies must be communicated via Form GST RFD-03. Failure to issue it led to the refund appli...
Goods and Services Tax : Supreme Court upholds arrest powers under GST and Customs Acts, ensuring procedural safeguards to prevent misuse. Learn about the ...
Income Tax : Learn key updates in the New Income Tax Bill, 2025, effective April 2026. Covers tax year, compliance, deductions, international t...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore Supreme Court's scrutiny of whether supplying cranes for services like loading, unloading, lifting, and shifting qualifies...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the case of Pradeep Kanthed v. Union of India where the Supreme Court issues notice to the Finance Ministry regarding the ...
Goods and Services Tax : Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax & Ors Vs Safari Retreats Private Limited & Ors (Supreme Court of India) The ...
Goods and Services Tax : The 45th meeting of Goods and Services Tax Council (“GST Council”) is scheduled to be held on September 17, 2021. The Ministry...
Custom Duty, Income Tax : The Karnataka High Court in M/s Pellagic Food Ingredients Private Ltd. v. Union of India [Writ Petition No. 14737/2021[T-CUS] issu...
Goods and Services Tax : Delhi High Court sets aside ITC denial due to incorrect GSTN on invoices, ruling in favor of B Braun Medical India Pvt. Ltd. in a ...
Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka High Court rules writ petitions cannot challenge tax intimations issued under Section 73(5) of CGST Act before a show ca...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court rules IGST refund cannot be denied for exports qualifying as zero-rated supply, even when higher duty drawback r...
Goods and Services Tax : Delhi High Court rules that GST law does not prohibit fresh registration after cancellation. Assessee granted liberty to reapply u...
Goods and Services Tax : Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that GST orders issued without a DIN are invalid, citing CBIC Circular and Supreme Court precedent...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 32/2015-Central Excise Dated- 4th June, 2015 Ethanol produced from molasses generated from cane crushed in the ...
Service Tax : Circular No. 184/3/2015-ST Dated the 3rd June, 2015 It is further clarified that exemption from service tax still continues to ser...
Custom Duty : the floods in the State of Jammu and Kashmir (the State) from whole of the duty as specified under the First Schedule and whole of...
Excise Duty : Grants exemption from Basic Excise Duty to goods donated or purchased out of cash donations for the relief and rehabilitation of p...
Custom Duty : New posts have been created in the rank of Commissioners of Customs in DRI and DGCEI for adjudication of cases as investigated by ...
Ramaiah Harish Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) It was held that an independent building can have a number of residential units and it will not lose the character of one residential house.
Appellant, during AY 2012-2013, paid a huge amount towards provision of toilet facilities in Government Schools where the children of employees of the Appellant were studying. While filing the returns for that year, the Appellant claimed the same amount as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenses and submitted that by incurring the expenses, its productivity improves and the loyalty of its employees are also ensured.
Finally, after facing every step of hurdle during past financial year, the final goal of every taxpayer is to assess their business records and analyse and correct the mistakes made during the past financial year either through GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B of September, 2021, following the end of financial year, being 2020- 21 Section 110 and […]
The provisions of the Customs Act and that of the HCCR do not absolve the custodian of the responsibilities as mentioned in these Regulations to be observed by the Custodians itself, the CESTAT do not find any infirmity with the order under challenge where simultaneously penalty has been imposed upon the Appellant as well.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of RE COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION [Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in SMW(C) No. 3/2020 dated April 27, 2021] under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India took suo motu cognizance considering the challenges faced by the litigants on account of COVID-19 and restored […]
CESTAT applied the User Test to the facts in hand and held that the structural items used in the fabrication of support structures would fall within the ambit of Capital Goods as contemplated under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, hence will be entitled to the Cenvat Credit.
Babu Khan Vs State of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court) In Babu Khan v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. there were a total of 121 Writ Petitions filed by the Liquor Vendors seeking waivers on the annual guarantee fee and tax relief for the second wave time period of COVID-19. In the case, the Petitioners contended […]
In Directorate of Enforcement v. Raj Singh Gehlot [ECIR/14/HQ-STF/2019 dated September 10, 2021], Raj Singh Gehlot (the Applicant) moved a bail application for grant of regular bail but the bail plea was dismissed by Hon’ble Patiala House Court. In this case the Hon’ble Patiala House Court dismissed the bail plea of Applicant, the owner of […]
Universal Buildrise Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) M/S. Universal Buildrise Private Limited (Appellant) filed an appeal against Order dated September 30, 2019 of the Ld. CIT(A)-9, New Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-2017. The Appellant filed its return of income declaring loss and paid taxes on book profit under Minimum Alternate Tax […]
Jodhpur Bench held that mere time gap between withdrawals and deposits cannot be a sole basis for rejecting the explanation of the Appellant as there was no material that amount so withdrawn had been utilized somewhere else. The Court believed that the explanation by the Appellant was reasonable and therefore, directed that the addition so made must be deleted.
