In re Jaipur Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (GST AAR Rajasthan) Central Government by way of Notification No. 50/2018 (Central Tax) dated 13.09.2018 appointed the 1st day of October, 2018, as the date on which the provisions of section 51 of the said Act shall come into force with respect to persons specified under […]
The service supplied by the Respondent under the Marketing Services Agreement dated 1 December 2012 constitutes a mixed supply of Services falling under the Heading Research and Development services having SAC 9981, under the Heading Other professional, technical and business services bearing SAC 9983, and under the Heading other miscellaneous services bearing SAC 9997.
Cengres Tiles Ltd. Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) The Gujarat High Court has held that only after the notice is served under Section 46 of the CGST Act and the assessment is done by the proper officer under Section 62, can the goods and the bank accounts of the taxable person be attached […]
The contention of the petitioner that no FIR report can be lodged under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure for offences punishable under the IPC, as proceeding could only be drawn against him under the U.P. GST Act, 2017, is rejected.
Aeren Foundation Trust Vs Commissioner of Central CGST (Bombay High Court) The record indicates that the order in the appeal was duly served at the office of the appellant on 20th July 2017. Even the appellant admits that the order in the appeal was so received by some staff member of the appellant Trust. Accordingly, […]
Shree Shiv Vankeshawar Educational & Social Welfare Trust Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Admittedly the assessee has received a donation of INR 16265000/– from 1038 individuals and ld CIT (A) has noted that same is credited to the income and expenditure account of the assessee, However ld AO has noted that same is credited as Corpus […]
Dr. Prannoy Roy & Ors. Vs SEBI (SAT) it is essential for SEBI to supply a copy of the impugned order to the aggrieved party, namely, the appellants. An adjudication proceeding had been initiated by SEBI by issuance of the show cause notice. The appellants thus have the first right to be supplied a copy […]
Assessee had incurred only office expenditure and no expenditure relating to transportation of goods such as loading, unloading charge etc., has been debited, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee actually engaged himself not in the transportation business, but only facilitating or arranging transportation for various parties and he is a mere lorry booking agent. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the assessee cannot be held as the person responsible for deduction of tax at source and to the facts of the case the provisions under section 194C of the Act have no application.
From ‘date of allotment’ of capital asset, i.e., 15-2-2007 the holding period was more than 36 months on sale of property on 4-8-2010 as such, revenue authorities were not justified in treating the holding period from date of registration of property, i.e., 30-9-2009 and treating it as short-term capital gains, deduction under section 54F was, therefore, allowable.
ACIT Vs Ashwin S. Bhalekar Beamon Chambers (ITAT Mumbai) Claim of the assessee that extinguishment of rights in the capital asset is a transfer of capital asset and capital gains and consequent allowance of claim of deduction under section 54 of the Act. The facts clearly show that the extinguishment of assessee’s right in Flat […]
