Second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) is retrospective in nature and in such circumstances, if payee has paid tax to government account then payer cannot be held liable for non-deduction of TDS.
If the assessee has huge interest free funds including the profit earned by it during the year, which is sufficient to cover the advancement of loan, then no interest could be disallowed under section 36(i)(iii).
Shri Kumudchandra Atmaram Patel Vs M/s TTK Prestige Limited (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) Respondent had increased the base price of the product from Rs. 1,640.62 to Rs. 1,779.66, when the rate of tax was reduced from 28% to 18% with effect from 15.11.2017.Thus, by increasing the base price of the product, post-GST, the benefit of reduction […]
It is evident that there was no reduction in the rate of tax on supply of Courier Service after the implementation of GST, instead there was increase in the rate of tax from 15% in pre-GST regime to 18% in post-GST regime. The fact that the Respondent had increased his base price for providing courier service from Rs. 69.5/- to Rs. 80/- has no relevance in view of the fact that there has been no reduction in the rate of tax nor increased benefit on account of Input Tax Credit was available and hence the provisions of Section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 can not be invoked in this case.
Pr. CIT Vs Roshan Lal Sancheti (Rajasthan High Court) it must be held that statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act and later confirmed in statement recorded under section 131 of the Act, cannot be discarded simply by observing that the assessee has retracted the same because such retraction ought to have been generally […]
Naitik Enterprise Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) In terms of sub-section (25) of section 2 of the Customs Act, once the goods are cleared for home consumption, they no longer retain the identity of the imported goods. Under the circumstances, once the goods have been cleared, such goods no longer remain to be […]
Vasu Corporation Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) 1. Mr. Uchit Sheth, learned advocate for the petitioner has, inter alia, submitted that upon the vehicle in question together with the goods being detained under section 129(1) of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the GST Act”), the petitioner has […]
In re E-DP Marketing Private Limited (GST AAR Madhya Pradesh) The Applicant shall be liable to pay IGST on ocean freight paid on imported goods under Reverse Charge Mechanism in terms of Notification No.10/2017-IT(R) and Notification No.8/2017-IT(R) irrespective of the ocean freight component having been a part of the CIF value of imported goods. FULL […]
GST should not be collected by builders at higher rate on services relating to the preferential location of the unit and right to use car parking space and common areas and facilities
ITAT held that As there was part non-compliance by assessee with first notice under section 142(1) and complete non-compliance with subsequent notice under section 142(1), the AO was right in framing assessment order under section 144 and in denying allowance of interest and salary paid to partners by taking support of provisions of section 184(5).
