It is the case of the assessee that the rent payment to the licensor is independent of the CAM charges payable and thus the CAM charges cannot partake the character of rent. The assessee thus contends that the deduction rate applicable on CAM charges @2% under Section 194C has been rightly deducted.
There is no provision under head Profits and Gains from business or profession which deems rental income from unsold flats held as stock as Business income.
According to HC, the central issue, to which the Assessing Officer (AO) should have applied his mind is, as to whether the investment in shares of Agile by the petitioner was a capital account transaction, given the fact that there is no allegation of round-tripping.
Sureshbhai Vihabhai Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) There is no dispute to the fact that there is a downfall in the gross profit ratio declared by the assessee in the year under consideration in comparison to the earlier years. But the controversy arises whether the downfall in the gross profit ratio gives the authority to […]
HC held that Writ Court should not in exercise of its writ jurisdiction should substitute the findings of an assessing officer in his order with its own.
By no stretch of imagination could it be said that the payment for breach of contractual obligation pursuant to an arbitration award in the pending litigation, cannot be said to have been incurred for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law.
When the question is considered in the larger perspective, it is clear that there is no violation as alleged, more so because the PSI certificate issued by the Branch was subsequently ratified by the DGFT (as reflected in paragraph 25 of the Order-in-Original), which serves the purpose.
Myteam11 Fantasy Sports Private Limited Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) The petitioners have been served with a show cause notice under Section 74(1) of the Central Goods & Services Tax, 2017(for short ‘CGST, 2017’) alleging that the petitioner-Company by misclassifying their supply as service instead of actionable claims which are goods and by […]
Appeal against GST Registration cancellation order filed after stipulated time limit – Power of High Court to condone delay in such appeal filing – Registry directed to place matter before Chief Justice of High court as two contradictory views expressed by two Hon’ble Judges of Madras High Court.
HC held that Demand order passed beyond the period of 7 days from the date of service of notice is contrary to the provisions of the CGST Act
