Delhi High Court held that interest on delayed refunds as per section 56 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is payable when refund remains unpaid even after sixty days from the date of application for refund.
ITAT Mumbai held that the finance costs having direct nexus with the business should be allowed as a deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.
Kerala High Court held as per Section 10(1)(b) of the IGST Act, the place of supply of goods in case where the supply is made on the direction of the 3rd person, it would be deemed as 3rd person has received the goods and the place of supply of such goods shall be the principal place of business of such 3rd person.
ITAT Mumbai held that the rates on which power is available through Indian Energy Exchange cannot be applied, because these are not the rates to the consumers but rates to the DISCOMs. Accordingly, transfer pricing adjustment deleted.
Dive into the Shreehas P Tambe vs. SEBI case, exploring insider trading regulations, violations, legalities, and the significant SAT decision.
Delhi High Court held that the notification dated 29th January 2020, retrospectively revoking the benefit under the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) in respect of Flexible Intermediate Bulk Container bags, with effect from 7th March 2019, is unjustified and unsustainable in law.
Explore the detailed analysis of the ITO Vs. Direct Trading Co. case at ITAT Delhi, focusing on unexplained share capital, share premium, and investment additions.
Learn about Bombay High Court’s Quashing of Reassessment notice by the Tax Department against a non-existent entity with an active PAN in this AY 2016-17 and AY 2017-18 case study.
Jai Ba Metals Vs CCE (CESTAT Chandigarh) – Rule 9 will not be applicable When the goods are sold to related persons as well as to independent buyers
Mere lack of supplier response won’t invalidate appellant’s Kraft Paper production. Find out more about this CESTAT Ahmedabad order in this blog post!
