State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Ahuja Radios (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) The DGAP after scrutiny of the above two invoices issued by the Respondent has intimated that there was no increase in the per unit price (excluding GST) in respect of both the products mentioned in the above invoices. The base Price per unit […]
It is apparent from the perusal of the facts of the case that there was no reduction in the rate of tax on the above product w.e.f. 01-07-2017, as could be seen from the table given above. There is also no increase in the per unit base price (excluding tax) of the above product and therefore the allegation of profiteering is not established.
Kerala State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Janson (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) It is apparent from the perusal of the facts of the case that there was no reduction in the rate of tax on the above product w.e.f. 01-07-2017, hence the anti-profiteering provisions contained in Section 171(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax […]
The legal obligation imposed on deqaler cannot be ignored only because he is not the manufacturer who controls the prices, as he is accountable as a supplier to pass on the benefit of GST rate reduction. T
ITO Vs Aggregate Finance & Investment P. Ltd (ITAT Delhi) Be that as it may, as adverted to supra, the case of the Ld. AO while recording the reasons was that the assessee derived the income as a provider of bogus accommodation entries. However, the addition was made on account of receipt of share application […]
In re Shradha Polymats (GST AAR Maharastra) Whether 4601 as the HSN Classification of Polypropylene Mats is correct? Heading appropriate for Polypropylene Mats made from plaiting materials is 4601 and the relevant sub-heading is 4601 99. However as it is not necessary to go beyond four digit level for the purpose of this Advance Ruling, […]
Wherever special benches are constituted, the special benches shall, as far as possible, commence hearing within 120 days of the benches being constituted. In the cases in which the respective bench is not in a position to commence hearing of the matter within 120 days for any specific reason, e.g. directions of the Hon’ble Court above or blocking the hearing awaiting decision of a higher judicial forum, it shall record the reasons, in brief, for delay in commencement for hearing. Sincere endeavour shall be made for expeditious disposal of Special Bench cases.
ITO Vs Shri Suresh Chand Gupta (ITAT Kolkata) On the basis of evidences filed by assessee its claim was to be allowed where income in question was a bona fide long-term capital gains arising from sale of shares and hence, exempt from tax as there was no material indicating assessee’s nexus with alleged share price rigging. FULL […]
Rajit Jain-succeesor And Legal Heir Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Allahabad) 1. The appellant is in appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that appellants are engaged in re-rubberisation of old, worn out rubberised rollers of various industries. The customers send them their used rollers at random and re-rubberisation comprises removing the old rubber […]
Where assessee had already paid income-tax on the amount surrendered during the course of survey, it could not be said that the surrendered income was not voluntary and the assessee wanted to conceal the income, therefore, imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified.
