The issue under consideration is whether the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source from the payment made towards Harvesting charges is justified in law?
In re Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation (GST AAR Uttarakhand) As per the provisions of section 9(3) of Act, the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, specify categories of supply of goods or services or both, the tax on which shall be paid on reverse charge basis by the recipient of such […]
In re Uttarakhand Forest Development (GST AAR Uttarakhand) What will be applicable rate for GST on royalty payable to Govt of Uttarakhand under RCM in respect of Reta, Bazri & Boulders extracted as per the permission of Govt authorities. The services rendered by the applicant during the period 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018 attract GST at the same rate […]
Shri Kasi Viswanathan Ramnathan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) The issue under consideration is whether the denial of exemption under section 54F by CIT(A) is justified in law? In the present case, assessee has claimed the exemption u/s 54F in the return including the amount which had not been utilized before 31.07.2012. But later the assessee utilized the entire sale […]
Explore the ITAT Bangalore case Ananda Social & Education Trust vs ACIT. Analysis of MBBS Management Quota fees suppression and legal conclusions. Learn more.
Compensation received in respect of non agricultural land which has been exempted from levy of income-tax vide section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act shall also not be taxable under the provisions of income-tax Act, 1961 even if there is no specific provision of exemption for such compensation in the Income-tax Act, 1961
The issue under consideration is whether A.O. is correct by adding long term capital gains by applying section 50C in case where land is transferred by the partner in his firm as capital contribution?
Satyam Smertex pvt. Ltd. DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) In this case on hand, the assessee had discharged its onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants, thereafter the onus shifted to AO to disprove the documents furnished by assessee and the documents produced by the assessee cannot be brushed aside by the […]
ITAT Remit Back the case of Actor Dulquer Salmann (Assessee) back to Assessing Officer (AO) as Information reconciling source for investments which were added as undisclosed income were placed before it but not placed before AO.
In the given case, the contention of the petitioner is essentially that, why the Appellate Authority deemed it necessary for the petitioners to pay 20% of the total demand, as a condition for stay of the balance 80% of the demand arising from the assessment order during the pendency of the appeal.
