In re Subway Systems India Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Haryana): Appeal rejected due to incomplete application and non-payment of requisite fee.
GST: Reason is heart beat of every conclusion. In absence of reasons order becomes lifeless. Non recording of reasons renders order to be violative of principles of natural justice.
Kuna Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT – ITAT Ahmedabad allowed assessee’s appeal, holding that assessee had provided sufficient details regarding identity and creditworthiness of shareholders.
CESTAT Chandigarh partly allowed Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.’s appeal against Service Tax demand, highlighting that tax under reverse charge applies when distributors incur reimbursable expenses for the taxable person. Dive into the case and understand the intricacies of the reverse charge mechanism.
In Roshan Sharma v. Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, Calcutta High Court sets aside tax demand, interest, and penalty due to lack of effective opportunity for the Assessee to rebut allegations. Understand the significance of proving movement of goods and services.
Read the CAAR ruling on Elentec India Pvt. Ltd.’s query regarding Customs duty exemption under Notification no. 09/2024 for manufacturing “ASSY-CASE-FRONT” and classification.
Analysis of Pooja Mehra vs Victory Ace case before NCLAT Delhi. Understanding IBC time limits, belated claims, and implications for creditors. Detailed judgment breakdown.
Calcutta High Court held that share application money or its repayment does not fall under Section 269SS & 269T, as the same are not loans or deposits, and do not attract penalties under Sections 271D and 271E of Income Tax Act.
Madras High Court grants Hajabandenawas a chance to resubmit documents for GSTR-1 vs GSTR-3B discrepancies without pre-deposit condition. Learn more about the case.
Delhi High Court ruling: Assessing Officer cannot assume jurisdiction under Section 147 of Income Tax Act without proper grounds. Detailed analysis and judgment.
