M/s Etiam Emedia Limited Vs ITO (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Conclusion: Reopening of assessment was justified as there was specific information available with the authorities that assessee was a dummy concern used to route unaccounted money by way of bogus share application money. It was not a case of mere suspicion, it was a case, wherein […]
MCA order in publishing the list of directors associated with struck off companies under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 on the Website of MCA, showing the status of assessee as disqualified Directors was not legally tenable as section 164(2) of the Companies Act would take effect only from the financial year 2014-15.
Shri Govind Gangadhar Sabane Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) There is no dispute to the fact that one capital asset was sold and thereafter, new house was constructed. That both the Revenue Authorities in their respective orders have agreed that the Inspector had visited the site and has reported that residential house has been constructed consisting […]
In re M/s Blackstone Diesels (AAR Rajasthan) The ‘Air Dryer complete with final filter for used in breaking system of locomotive’ has been rightly classified by the supplier under Chapter 8421 of GST Tariff Act 2017 which attracts GST @18% (CGST 9% + SGST 9% ). FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN […]
Honda Motor Co. Ltd. Case: Where Reassessment Is Based Only On Allegation That Appellant Has PE In India, Notice Under Section 148 Cannot Sustain Once Arm’s Length Price Procedure Has Been Followed.
In re M/s Sam Overseas (GST AAR Uttarakhand) Classification and applicability of GST rate on the ‘Rejected Wheat Seed’ and ‘Rejected Paddy Seed’. Due to different views of members matter been referred to Appellate Authority hearing and decision on said issue in terms of Section 98(5) of the Act ibid which provide that where the […]
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon’ble ITAT was justified in allowing the claim of depreciation on public roads treating the same as building which is not permissible in law?
Pardeep Kumar Vs Union Territory, Chandigarh and others (Punjab and Haryana HC) The order reverting the petitioner is vindictive. The petitioner has absolute right to get the information under the Right to Information Act. Seeking information under the Right to Information Act cannot put question mark on his integrity. The appellate order has also over […]
State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Zeba Distributors (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) As there was no reduction in the rate of tax on the Eastern Meat Masala, hence the anti-profiteering provisions contained in Section 171(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 are not attracted. There is also no increase in the per unit […]
Shri Shylesh Damodaran Vs Landmark Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) It is clear from the plain reading of Section 171 (1) that it deals with two situations one relating to the passing on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax and the second pertaining to the passing on the benefit of the […]
