NCLT Delhi held that it may order winding up of a Company, the name of which has been struck off, but no power can be exercised for Insolvency Resolution under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, unless the name of the Company is restored
Rajasthan High Court rules on interest for delayed tax refund in Dwejesh Acharya vs. ITO case under Vivad Se Vishwas Act. Legal insights on tax dispute settlement.
In the case of Rohit Yadav Vs ACIT, ITAT directs denovo-adjudication as CIT(A)[NFAC] fails to discuss additional evidence. Read the full analysis and conclusion.
Cattle Feed Plant is an immovable property and supply of goods and services by the appellant for setting up and running of Cattle Feed Plant amounts to composite supply of works contract as defined in clause (119) of Section 2 of CGST Act, 2017
GST implications of incentives received under Atma Nirbhar Gujarat Sahay Yojna. Understand if it’s considered subsidy, its taxability, and GAAR ruling.
GST Appellate Authority upheld the key aspects of the Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling. AJL was not classified as a ‘Local Authority,’ and it was liable to pay GST on security and advertisement services. The requirement for GST registration as a deductor did not apply, and the attempt to be categorized as a ‘Government Entity’ or ‘Governmental Authority’ was dismissed.
CESTAT Delhi held that the most appropriate classification of canned pineapple slices will be CTH 0804. However, duty demand of extended period set aside as there was confusion in department regarding classification of canned sliced pineapples.
ITAT Mumbai held that delay of 33 months in filing appeal before Commissioner condoned on account of reasonable cause and outbreak of Covid-19. However, an amount of Rs. 51,000 directed to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund (PMNRF).
Since the inquiry had already been completed and the applicant had also filed her representation on the Inquiry Report, UPSC advice had also been given to the applicant to submit her representation, the applicant has had the opportunity to put forward her case including all relevant evidence and documents in support of her defence. Thus the disciplinary proceedings were at the final stage and the Charge Memorandum had been rightly issued.
Interest for period after 3 months refund of 19 crores of cenvat credit was allowable after expiry of three months from the date of filing the claim to the date of claim. In the present case refund claim was filed on 27.12.2012 the period of three months will be over on 26.03.2013. They would be entitled to the interest for the period beyond 26 March, 2013 to the date of payment i.e. 21.05.2013, which was about 55 days.
