The prohibition from allowing input tax credit is a statutory mandate, and the view taken by the orders impugned, in the facts and circumstances of this case, is available and correct.
The assessee is carrying on business activity of export of software development and distinct services as Proprietor of Versatiletech. The return was picked up for scrutiny for the reason of compliance with TDS provisions and also foreign outward remittances.
NCLAT Chennai held that post completion of liquidation process and property of Corporate Debtor is handed over to Successful Auction Purchaser, order u/s. 33(2) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, directing liquidation of corporate debtor’s cannot be revoked.
Assessee-a government-owned entity, had initially filed its income tax return for the assessment year 2016-17, declaring nil income after setting off carried-forward losses and reported book profits of Rs. 26.90 crore under the MAT provisions of Section 115JB.
NCLT Mumbai held that imposition of moratorium u/s. 14 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for the acquisition of land by Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority [MMRDA] by no stretch of imagination be extended against large public interest.
Madras High Court held that the existence of an alternative remedy precludes the petitioner from approaching this Court through a writ petition unless there is an exceptional circumstance.
Madras High Court held that service of notice/ order under GST by making available in the common portal is valid mode of service in terms of section 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Calcutta High Court held that liberty is granted to the petitioner to respond to notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act as the respondents are on the verge of bringing the assessment proceedings to a conclusion.
Delhi High Court held that facts narrated in notice u/s. 148A(b) couldn’t lead to conclusion that income has escaped assessment. Accordingly, reassessment proceedings initiated is liable to be set aside.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act upheld since assessee failed to compute suo moto disallowance which is mandatory, even if no exempt income is earned. Thus, appeal of assessee dismissed.
