West Bengal AAR rules that the supply of MVU personnel under the Livestock Health & Disease Control Scheme is not exempt under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate).
Calcutta High Court held that gratuity doesn’t form part of liquidation estate. Hence, entire dues of workers would not come under liquidation assets. Thus, writ dismissed and order directing payment of gratuity upheld.
NCLAT Delhi held that rejection of resolution plan of appellant justified as CoC deliberated and discussed the Resolution Plan of the Appellant. Thus, resolution plan with 97% vote share of CoC rightly approved.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that CIT(A) rightly restricted disallowance on account of unexplained bank deposit and withdrawal under section 68 of the Income Tax Act to 0.3% of total Circular Trading Transaction. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Held that the invoices issued by the assessee contained a barcode. A barcode on a tax invoice serves as a verification mechanism, ensuring that the sale is recorded in the system and adds a layer of authenticity.
It was held that in the original assessment under Section 143(1), the issue related to the deed of purchase of land was not looked into as the same was not reported in the assessee’s income before the Revenue.
When the corporate debtor failed to pay the outstanding power obligation, appellant subsequently cut off the electrical service. On the condition that the outstanding balance be paid, the power connection was restored. The supply was not discontinued.
Assessee then filed returns in response to the notice under Section 148, claiming a deduction under Section 80P. AO disallowed the deduction, stating that the returns were not filed within the due date under Section 139(1).
ITAT Delhi held that provisions of section 195 as well as section 40(a)(iii) are not attracted in case of salary paid to staff hired outside India and services were utilised outside India. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue dismissed.
Delhi High Court held that in view of Section 35L of the Central Excise Tax as the question of law involved is regarding the taxability of the service, the appeal would lie to the Supreme Court and before High Court. Thus, the present appeal is rejected.
