Gauhati High Court rules orders under AGST Act Section 73(9) invalid due to lack of a proper show cause notice, emphasizing compliance with legal procedures.
ITAT Surat held that purchase of credit cards by making cash payments without providing explanation with regard to nature and source of money is liable to be added under section 69A of the Income Tax Act.
Brunda Infra Pvt. Limited and Others. Vs Additional Commissioner of Central Tax (Telangana High Court) In this batch of writ petitions, the petitioners have called in question the legality, validity and propriety of notification Nos.13/2022, dated 05.07.2022, 9 and 56/2023, dated 31.03.2023 and 28.12.2023, respectively. The pari materia/ corresponding notification Nos.118/2023, dated 25.08.2023 and 170/2023, […]
CESTAT Delhi held that goods are liable for confiscation u/s. 111(m) of the Customs Act 1962 since goods are mis-declared with intention to evade imposition of anti-dumping duty under notification no. 51/2012-CUS(ADD) dated 03.12.2012. Further, penalty also imposed u/s. 114(A) of the Customs Act.
Petitioner is working as Asstt. Director in the Commercial Taxes Department. He submitted representation to Prinicipal Secratory Commercial Tax Department seeking for promotion to the post of Deputy Director Commercial Tax Department. He further prays for the correction his qualification in the service book.
Delhi High Court held that proviso to section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act doesn’t mean that if gains are not included as book profits u/s. 115JB, the same are liable to be included as income for purpose of assessment of tax under normal provisions.
It is the case of the assessee that it has not been provided with the opportunity of being heard before the Ld. AO/CPC, Bangalore while passing an order under Section 154/153(1) and additions were made due to inadvertent mistake of the tax auditor in both the employer and employee’s contributions. Actual due date of the salary should have been verified by the CPC/A.O.
In a recent ruling ITAT Delhi relied upon the binding precedent of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Subros Educational Society, (2018) 96 taxmann.com 652 (SC) in deciding that the set off of accumulated deficit is allowable.
NCLAT Delhi held that a Decree Holder falls within the purview of the Financial Creditor under the Code, if the decree is based on a financial debt. Accordingly, dismissal of petition u/s. 7 of IBC not justified.
In the matter abovementioned ITAT referred to the AO to examine the allowability of the claim u/s 11 of the Act in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the decision of ACIT Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority, (2022) 449 ITR 1 (SC).
