Tribunal had passed order u/s 254 (1) beyond one day beyond 90 days prescribed under the Rule 34(5)(c) from the date of conclusions of its hearing and the delay had resulted in prejudice to assessee hence, the order being not sustainable and restored for fresh consideration.
Addition made by AO was justified with regard to introduction of bogus share capital in the form of accommodation entries as the transactions done were clearly sham with excellent paper work to camouflage their bogus nature.
M/s. CLSA India Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Facts of the case: The assessee company, i.e. CLSA India Private Limited is a subsidiary of Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia (CLSA) incorporated in Netherlands. The assessee is primarily engaged in the business of equity broking. The assessee’s customers comprise of foreign institutional investors (FIIs) and domestic […]
In re R. R. Enterprises (GST AAR Haryana) Whether the provision of services (Manpower Supply) of tube well operator for operation of tube well and booster of drinking and irrigation water supply in various villages covered under Panchayat are exempt or taxable? It is case of the applicant that services supplied by it are exempted, […]
In re Space age syntex Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAAR Maharashtra) The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling set aside the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that No GST is applicable on the sale or purchase of DFIA, as provided in Sr. 122A of the Notification 02/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended by […]
Before taking up the application for consideration, the Applicant vide letter No. BAL/GST-Corres/134 dated 05.02.2019 informed in writing to withdraw the application filed under Section 97 of CGST/OGST Act,2017. Since, the Applicant is no more desirous of the ruling sought for the application for withdrawal is hereby allowed.
A ruling on whether the decision of the GST Council granting the exemption is binding on the Department in the absence of non-issuance of corresponding Notification by the Central/State Government is not within the competence and mandate of the Authority of Advance Ruling constituted u/s 96 of the OGST Act.
AO was incorrect in making addition towards deposits found in foreign bank account of assessee maintained with HSBC Bank, Geneva without establishing the fact that the said deposit was sourced out of income derived in India, when the assessee had filed necessary evidences to prove that he was a non resident since 25 years and his foreign bank account and assets did not have any connection with India and that the same have been acquired / sourced out of foreign income which had not accrued / arisen in India.
Conversion of cumulative and compulsory convertible preference shares(CCPS) into equity shares cannot be treated as ‘transfer’ under section 2(47) and no capital gain is to be computed upon such conversion.
ITO Vs KSK Wind Energy Halagali Benchi Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Hyderabad) Assessee’s have been incorporated on 03-01-2011 with the object of generation of electricity from non-conventional sources, the project of which is proposed in the state of Karnataka and for this purpose investments have been received in the form of equity capital of the assessee companies […]
