Income Tax : Dive into the Principle of Mutuality, exploring its meaning, tax implications, and impact on cooperative societies. Discover case ...
Fema / RBI : It is felt that enormous powers are conferred on Banks or Public Financial Institutions under SARFAESI Act, 2002 from the stage of...
Finance : I strongly believe that implementing the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 making a good balance between the object and the int...
Goods and Services Tax : Levy of sales tax on a higher percentage on ‘superior kerosene oil' (SKO) (also called white kerosene oil) and also levy of resa...
Income Tax : For the sake of convenience, the attached tables summarises the valuation rules for all perquisites prescribed in the new rule 3 e...
Income Tax : A dozen private nursing homes and hospitals today lost their approval granted under Section 17(2) of the Income Tax Act on the bas...
Company Law : The application made by the Financial Creditor is complete in all respects as required by law. Therefore, the debt and default sta...
Custom Duty : The appellants had filed a refund claim with Assistant Commissioner of Customs (CRS), Visakhapatnam for Rs.5,03,984/- on 10.08.202...
DGFT : Delhi High Court observed that once the DGFT had proceeded to issue the MEIS scrip to the writ petitioners, they would have been j...
Corporate Law : These orders arises out of demand notice dated 3/3/2011 issued by respondent no.2 calling upon the Federation to pay an amount of ...
Company Law : The Appellant- Operational Creditor had undertaken to provide services for production of Television Commercial, print shoot and di...
Income Tax : Circular No. 2/2010-Income Tax The Finance Act, 2005 introduced a levy namely Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) on the value of certain fr...
Income Tax : Notification No. 94/2009 - Income Tax For the purpose of computing the income chargeable under the head Salaries, the value of pe...
The application made by the Financial Creditor is complete in all respects as required by law. Therefore, the debt and default stand established and there is no reason to deny the admission of the Petition.
The appellants had filed a refund claim with Assistant Commissioner of Customs (CRS), Visakhapatnam for Rs.5,03,984/- on 10.08.2023. The said refund claim was that the appellant had paid the Duty twice due to ‘ICEGATE error’.
Delhi High Court observed that once the DGFT had proceeded to issue the MEIS scrip to the writ petitioners, they would have been justified in assuming that the issue of classification was neither questioned nor doubted.
These orders arises out of demand notice dated 3/3/2011 issued by respondent no.2 calling upon the Federation to pay an amount of Rs.14,21,145/- and to deposit the same to the credit of respective EPF accounts of the employees of the Federation.
The Appellant- Operational Creditor had undertaken to provide services for production of Television Commercial, print shoot and digital content for the Respondent -Patanjali Paridhan Private Limited under the terms of proforma invoice dated 17.10.2018.
Delhi High Court held that keeping in abeyance refund order by exercising powers conferred u/s. 108 of the CGST Act merely on the basis of intelligence regarding wrongful availment of ITC unjustified since pre-requisite conditions for invoking section 108 not satisfied.
Karnataka High Court held that the appellate authority under POSH Act, 2013, despite the absence of specific provision for granting of interim order, would have the power to consider the interim application.
Supreme Court held that officers of DRI are entrusted with the functions of proper officer and thus has jurisdiction to issue show cause notices for recovery of duty under section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Petitioner is engaged in manufacturing of Duplex Board. The present writ petition has been preferred seeking to recover a sum of Rs.3,66,649/- which was paid by the petitioner to the Department as interest in excess of actual interest liability.
Further, in reference application filed under the Settlement Act, the Dy CST passed an order of settlement u/s 13(1) and arrived at the same figure of the settlement amount which were calculated by the assessee in its application.
