Whether the PVC Carpet Mats manufactured by the applicant is classifiable under Tariff item 5705 00 49 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and therefore, in view of Entry 146 of Schedule II of Notification 01/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28 June 2017 as amended from time to time, attract a levy of 12%.
What is the classification of Service provided in accordance with Notification No 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, read with Annexure attached to it, by the State of Rajasthan to M/s Aravali Polyart Private Limited for which royalty is being paid ? Whether said Service can be classified under SAC 9973 specifically under 997337 as Licensing Services for the right to use minerals including its exploration and evaluation or as any other Service? On given Services, tax is payable by Service receiver under Reverse Charge Mechanism owing to Notification No. 13/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2018?
The common issue which falls for consideration in these batch of cases is as to whether the respondent, the Income Tax Department, is justified in insisting upon recovery of tax at source from the salary payable to Nuns/Fathers/Priests working in various Teaching Institutions established and administered by the petitioners.
Where the intention of assessee for purchase of the land was for resale and within a short period of time though the sale was only to the companies of which the assessee was a director, it was apparent that assessee was acting as an interface to purchase the lands from the land owners and then converted in non-agricultural use and sold to these companies who were in the business of real estate. Hence, properties sold were not excluded from the meaning of capital asset, as they were not agricultural land as defined by section 2(14).
M/s. SDB Estate Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) We find that the assessee, in this case, had filed detailed evidence to prove the genuineness of transactions e.g. copies of form for allotment of shares, confirmation of shareholders and other documents as mentioned above. The department has relied upon the general statement of Shri Mukesh […]
Where the exemption claimed under section 11 and 12 has been denied by the Assessing officer, what can be brought to tax is the net income in the hands of the assessee trust and not the gross receipts.
Pr. CIT Vs DLF Commercial Projects Corporation (Delhi High Court) Neither the provisions of section 194C nor section 194J obliges the person making the payment to deduct anything from contractual payments such as those made for reimbursement of expenses, other than what is defined as “income”. The law thus obliges only amounts which fulfil the […]
When the very arrest of the petitioners is not prohibited prior to the completion of the assessment, any coercive action lesser than arrest, can not also be said to be prohibited.
DCIT (E) Vs Shree Bhartimaiya Memorial Foundation (ITAT Ahmedabad) The solitary question that arises for adjudication whether the trust has incurred deficit due to excess spending on the object of the trust during the particular year and whether excess expenditure incurred in earlier years by the trust could be allowed to be set off against […]
CIT Vs Saifee Hospital Trust (Bombay High Court) The Assessing Officer held that services of catering rendered by M/s Monginis is technical service and therefore, deduction of tax at source by the respondent has to be under Section 194J of the Act. However, in appeal both the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) as well […]
