In re M/s. Hyva India Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Maharashtra) In the present case, the Hydraulic Kit is used on bodies/ platform, detaching sides, tipper bodies falling under Chapter Heading No.8709 as well as for other trailers for transport of goods such as agricultural, public works etc., trailer (whether or not tipper) falling under Heading […]
In re Ms Narsingh Transport (AAR GST Madhya Pradesh) The applicant desire the advance ruling on the subject that whether the GST paid on these cars provided to their different customers on lease rent will be available to it as INPUT TAX CREDIT(ITC) in terms of Section 17(5) of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, […]
In re M/s. Narsingh Transport (GST AAR Madhya Pradesh) 1. The Applicant is entitled to avail ITC on cars (passenger vehicles) which are further supplied to customers on lease rent, subject to condition applicable in such supply of services as per notification number 11/2017-Central Tax(Rate) Dated 28.06.17 as amended from time to time and corresponding […]
In re H.P. Sales India Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAAR Maharashtra) The supplies of the Appellant have been held to be a continuous supply by the Advance ruling authority and while deciding whether the supply is composite or not have done so keeping in mind the continuous nature of the supply. They have stated that each […]
In terms of the provisions of section 245H of the Act, no immunity from penalty and prosecution can be granted by the ITSC since the complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. for offences punishable under section 276 CC of the Act, was instituted before the receipt of the application under section 245C.
Limit of exemption of Rs. 50 lakh under section 194-IA(2) was applicable to each transferee separately as each transferee was a separate income tax entity therefore, the law has to be applied with reference to each transferee as an individual transferee / person and not with reference to the amount as per sale deed.
Addition made by AO on the reason that assessee had introduced his own unaccounted money by way of bogus long term capital gain was not correct as AO had not brought any material on record to show that assessee had paid over and above purchase consideration of shares as claimed and evident from the bank account and assessee had produced the relevant record to show the allotment of shares by the company on payment of consideration by cheque.
Difference between alleged fair market value of share and the subscribed value of shares cannot be assessed as income u/s 56(2)(vii)(c) as the transaction of issue of shares was carried out to comply with a covenant in the loan agreement with the bank to fund the acquisition of the business by the subsidiary in USA, therefore, such a bonafide business transaction could not be taxed under section 56(2)(vii) especially when there was not even a whisper about money laundering by the AO in the assessment order.
What will be the correct HSN code and consequently rate of GST applicable on ‘Ready to cook popcorn premix i.e. Popcorn Maize with edible oil and salt’, sold in retail pack size ranging from 30 grams to 350 grams.
Amended 80A (5) could not be read as a stipulation barring and restricting the assessee from revising the computation/claim for deduction made in accordance with Section 80A (5).
