In re Pansut Udyog Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Haryana) The supply of Electrical energy units through diesel generators is covered under Tariff code-27160000-Elecrical Energy- attracting NIL rate of Tax. The applicant wants to confirm as to whether the NIL rate of tax selected by it is correct. Applicant is neither an electricity generating nor an […]
In re National Institute of Technology (GST AAR Haryana) Whether the pure services supplied to the applicant institute such as manpower supply services, security services, horticulture services, civil maintenance and electrical maintenance services etc. shall be liable to tax under GST or exempt from payment of tax vide Entry 3 of Notification 12/2017- Central Tax […]
In re Kansai Nerolac Paints Limited (GST AAR Maharashtra) Question: Whether value of supply of goods by one distinct entity (Factory/depot) as defined under sec 25(4) of the CGST Act 2017 as amended to another distinct entity (Factory/depot) can be determined on the basis of our cost of production. Our cost of production depends mainly […]
In re Arihant Enterprises (GST AAR Maharashtra) Question :- 1. Whether supply of ice-cream by the applicant from its retail outlets would be treated as supply of ‘goods’ or supply of ‘service’ or a ‘composite supply’ and subject to GST accordingly? Answer:- The supply of ice-cream by the applicant from its retail outlets would be […]
Meghraj Moolchand Burad Vs Directorate General of GST (Intelligence) (Bombay High Court) The learned counsel appearing for the Investigating Agency has produced on record a letter dated 26.11.2018 addressed by Advocate on record of the applicant to the DGGI, Pune informing him that, the present matter was on board before this Court on 24.11.2018 at […]
Reading of Section 80HH along with Section 80A would clearly signify that such a deduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as specified in Sections 30 to 43D of the Act.
Conclusion: AO was directed to wait in respect of tax ability of interest income received from the insurance company on MACT claim till the Supreme Court pronounce a judgement in Sharda Pareek v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & another as the same issue was pending before the Court.
Shri Dinesh Goswami Vs DCIT (ITAT Indore) When Source of Income Fully Explained Past Savings Kept in Locker is Justifiable in Law FACTS – Search was carried out on 30.11.2012 on the premises of assessee. Notice u/s 153A was issued to assessee to file return for AY 2007-08 to AY 2012-13. During the search cash […]
Where assessee had erroneously taken credit for prepaid taxes on account of gross professional receipts as per Form 26AS ; then having regard to Rule 37BA, Revenue would be justified in denying credit for such amount of prepaid taxes which were not assessable during the year on the basis of regular method of accounting followed by the assessee.
Section 40(a)(ia) can be applied only when amount sought to be disallowed has been claimed as an expenditure/deduction. In absence of the amount having been claimed as expenditure while determining the income, dis allowance would not be attracted.
