Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka HC ruled that under Section 75(4) of CGST Act, a hearing opportunity must be granted before passing an adverse order. Ba...
Goods and Services Tax : Discover the significant changes proposed under GST in the Union Budget 2024-25, impacting the CGST, IGST, UTGST, and GST (Compens...
Custom Duty : Discover the key changes in customs and excise duties proposed in the Union Budget 2024-25, including updated rates and legislativ...
Income Tax : Discover the key changes in India's Income Tax Law from the Union Budget 2024-25. Highlights include revised tax slabs, increased ...
Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka HC grants Cultgear Pvt Ltd refund, pending GST tribunal formation, with a bank guarantee. Liberty to appeal extended til...
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 : Madras HC sets aside dismissal of GST appeal for delay, remands case to the appellate authority for fresh consideration despite th...
Goods and Services Tax : Delhi HC grants interim protection to a petitioner alleging misuse of GST credentials for ITC claims, pending further investigatio...
Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka HC remands R.S Marketing's case, granting a fresh hearing on ITC discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A due to non-co...
Service Tax : Zest Buildtek Promotors Vs Deputy Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Madras High Court)Issuance of attachment order under provi...
Goods and Services Tax : Allahabad HC rules that failing to record reasons in INS-01 before initiating a search under Section 67 of CGST Act invalidates th...
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 ...
ITAT in Piyushbhai Mangalbhai Patel Vs ITO has deleted the addition of Rs. 12,70,000/- observing that personal savings of government employees could not be suspected for several years.
Whether the Rajasthan Housing Board is covered under the definition of Governmental Authority as defined in clause (zf) Paragraph 2 vide notification no. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017?
In the case of JCIT v. Rahul Rajnikant Parikh, ITAT Mumbai held that interest income need not be assessed when assessee is a Non-resident.
ITAT held that non- mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) as per instruction of CBDT in Circular No.19/2019 dated 14.08.2019 invalidates revision order for violation of procedure.
ITAT held that payment received in India for providing logistics support services cannot be treated as royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) or fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of Income Tax Act, 1961
ITAT held that credit of bona fide assessee cannot be denied in case where assessee committed technical/typographical error during return filing.
HC held that benefit under SVLDR Scheme could not be denied on the ground that the quantification required to be done under SVLDR Scheme is actually self-assessment done during duration of Audit.
In the instant case, the view of the Authority to reject the credit on the ground of ‘no nexus’ could have been done only by taking recourse to Rule 14 of CCR. In the present case, since the Authority has rejected the credit solely on the ground of ‘no nexus’ which legally does not sustain.
AAR held that, a walltop computer is neither a micro-computer nor a large computer and to be classified as an automatic data processing unit covered under Customs Tariff heading 8471 41 90.
ITAT held that in no case entire sales amount can be treated as income and only profit embedded should be treated as income for computation of income under Income Tax Act, 1961
