In a recent case of M/s. Fresh and Honest Cafe LTD. V. The Deputy Commissioner [Ct] and Anr. (Karnataka High Court) , a ruling was stated by Justice S. Sujatha (Karnataka High Court) that stats that any mistake said to have been committed by a learned CA in filing VAT Form 240 will not be seen as an intentional mistake and further not levy section 69(1) as court rule by Karnataka high court.
No profiteering found in Sanjay Devan Vs Vatika Ltd. case. DGAP reports no ITC benefit or tax rate reduction. Section 171 not applicable.
Assessee, in the instant case, has not concealed the income deliberately (particularly in the light of the fact that advances have been shown in the balance sheet filed even along with the original return) and therefore, is not liable for imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act.
For the period from 10-2-2006, the definition of the term ‘export’ under the Customs Act is not consistent with the definition of the term ‘export’ under the SEZ Act. However, the definition of the term ‘export’ under the SEZ Act shall prevail over the definition of term ‘export’ under the Customs Act. Therefore, supplies made to SEZ from DTA units shall be treated as export.
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & S. Tax (CESTAT Kolakata) Vide Notification No. 26/2014-C.E. (N.T.), dated 27-8-2014 – In the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, in rule 9, in sub-rule (1), after clause (f), the following clause shall be inserted, namely “(fa) a Service Tax Certificate for Transportation of goods by Rail […]
In re Rajeev Kumar, Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Elefo Biotech Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAAR Uttarakhand) The present appeal has been filed by the Assistant commissioner CGST review/concerned officer and asked to pass necessary order holing that the AMI is classifiable under other enzymes of microbial origin’ ‘other’ falling under chapter sub-heading 35079069 of heading 3507 […]
G. Vasudevan Vs Union of India (Madras High Court) Section 167 of the Companies Act as stated earlier gives instances where the office of a Director shall become vacant. Section 167(1)(a) states that if a Director incurs any disqualification specified in Section 164, then he vacates his seat as a The proviso which is under […]
In case of unabated assessment under section 153A(1)(b), unless such assessment was based upon incriminating documents seized/impounded during the course of search, no addition could be made under section 153A.
Synergy Baxi Logistics Pvt Ltd. Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi) It is held that if the two services are billed separately then there is no question of including them together for computation of taxable value for payment of service tax. It can be seen from the above reproduced clarification given by the Board that in 2002 […]
A conjoint reading of the Rule 117 and 120A of CGST Rules, 2017clearly reveals that every registered person who has submitted a declaration electronically in FORM G.S.T. T.R.A.N-1 within the period specified in Rule 117 or Rule 118 or Rule 119 or Rule 120 is allowed to revise such declaration once and submit the revised declaration in FORM G.S.T. T.R.A.N-1 electronically on the common portal,
