HC found no infirmity with decision of Adjudicating Authority and its findings that certain parties were involved in illegal export of Red Sandalwood/Red Sanders
Present applicant was working as ACIT. Accused No. 2 who was an Income Tax Inspector approached PW-6 and told him that there was a complaint filed against him and for that he should meet the present applicant i.e. ACIT.
CESTAT held that even though setting up of a new factory, construction of building of service provider is not excluded from the definition of Input service. In this case the construction of Jetty is clearly in the nature of expansion of existing Jetty therefore, credit is clearly admissible.
Virtusa Systems (India) Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court) In this case issuance of form SVLDRS-3 was necessary, and it was not issued to the Petitioner due to the error on the part of the Respondents is an accepted position. The Petitioner therefore is entitled to a direction to the […]
PCIT has tried to super impose his view in exercise of powers u/s. 263 of Income Tax Act over one of possible view taken by Assessing Officer.
Balaji Engineering Works Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court) GST Registration Certificate of the Petitioner is cancelled vide order dated 20.01.2021. The appeal filed by the Petitioner is dismissed by the Appellate Authority only on the ground that the Petitioner did not avail the remedy under Section 30 of the CGST Act. […]
Appellate Authority while dismissing the appeal has observed that the Petitioner ought to have filed application under section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for revocation of cancellation of the registration.
Shri. Datta Kripa Majur Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) 1. Both Mr. Bapat and Mr. Adik in unison state that the order passed by this court on 2nd May 2022 in Writ Petition No. 5273 of 2022 would squarely apply to the facts and circumstances of this case as well. […]
MSK Electricals Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) 1 The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the registration of the Petitioner was cancelled under order dated 3rd February 2021. The limitation period for filing the Appeal and Application was extended by the orders of the Supreme Court on 30th September 2021. The appeal […]
Hc held that alternative remedy will not operate as an absolute bar for entertaining the writ petition as jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter. Therefore, we are of the view that appellant has made out a case for entertaining this appeal” and had also stayed the further re-assessment proceedings.
