Space Enclave Private Limited Vs Income Tax Department and Others (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Since the jurisdictional issue has been raised before this Court, even assuming an alternative remedy u/S 246 of the Act of filing an appeal is available, it will not operate as an absolute bar for entertaining the writ petition as jurisdictional […]
HC held that it was incumbent on the CT and GST Officer to accept the payment of tax by using electronic credit ledger (ECL).
CESTAT held that respondent are entitle for the cenvat credit on the service of Repair & Maintenance during warranty period
Leading Point Powertronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner, Central Excise & CGST-Delhi South (CESTAT Delhi) Division Bench of CESTAT Delhi in Parle Agro Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner, CGST, Noida 2022 (380) ELT 219 (Tri.-All), held that interest on refund of amount deposited during investigation or deposited during pendency of appeal is allowable under Section 35EE of the […]
Bhaveshbhai Manilal Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) In this case by Information noted by the AO of cash deposits of Rs.10.00 lakhs in the bank account of the assessee leading to belief of escapement of income, has been duly demonstrated before me to be incorrect. The actual cash deposits were only to the tune of […]
The product carries a processing ability of a laptop and functionality of a scanner in a single wireless device. These Portable Computers essentially perform 1D and 2D barcode scanning and additionally have ferture s like Wi- Fi/Bluetooth connectivity, data transfer etc.
CAAR rule that all models of WIEWSONIC Brand LCD Monitors’ covered under present application are classifiable under sub-heading 8528 52 00 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and would be eligible to avail benefit of duty exemption under sr. no. 17 of Notification No. 24/2005-Customs, dated 01.03.2005, as amended.
Delhi High Court held that right to use radio frequency spectrum or its subsequent transfer covered under Clause (j) of Section 66E which was effective from 14.05.2016. Accordingly, compensation received during Financial Year 2015-2016 not leviable to service tax.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act alleging inaccurate particulars not leviable as assessee was subjected to tax on book profits u/s 115JB.
Jharkhand High Court held that show cause notice u/s 73(1) on mismatch in GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A issued on standard format without strucking off unnecessary particulars or without specifying contraventions is termed as vague.
