In re Hariom Enterprises (GST AAR Uttar Pradesh) Whether non Laminated Bags manufactured by the Applicant from HDPE/PP Strips of width not exceeding 5mm, used for packing sugar (sugar bag), Flour (Flour bag), Food grain (Grain Bag) and other similar bags are classifiable under Tariff Heading 6305 or heading 3923 of the Customs Tariff Act […]
In Re Data Matics Global Services Ltd. (GST AAR Uttar Pradesh) (i) Whether a contract can be treated as Composite Contract under GST if it involves making of supply of goods and services which are inter- connected and inter- dependent on each other even though BOQ mentions separate value of goods and services. A contract […]
In re SPFL Securities Ltd. (GST AAR Uttar Pradesh) Question – Taxability on delayed payment charges on reimbursement of amount by client to applicant, where client failed to pay amount paid to stock Exchanges for purchase of securities with T+1 (Trading day plus one day) under SEBI regulation norms and deducted by Stock Exchange from […]
In re Ms Geojit Financial Services Ltd. (GST AAAR Kerala) The Computers, Laptops etc. used for providing output service would not qualify as inputs, though they are physically available as on 30th June, 2017, for the purpose of availing transitional ITC input tax credit of the VAT paid during the pre-GST period, under Section 140 […]
In re M/s Abbott Health Care Private Ltd. (GST AAAR Kerala) Placement of specified medical instruments to unrelated customers like hospitals, labs etc. for their use without any consideration, against an agreement containing minimum purchase obligation of products like reagents, calibrators, disposals etc. for a specific period constitute a composite supply, the principal supply being […]
The supply of medicines and allied items to the outpatients through the pharmacy attached to the hospital run by the appellant is taxable under GST.
M/s Honda Motorcycle & Scooter Vs CCE & ST (CESTAT Delhi) Conclusion: Cenvat credit is allowable on service tax paid on rent of infrastructural facilities as common facilities availed by assessee on rent basis were in ‘relation to the manufacture of goods’ and an integral part of the overall activity of manufacturing. . Held: In […]
Explore Amit Acharya’s case at ITAT Ahmedabad involving unexplained cash credit and disputed capital gains. Understand the key findings and decisions.
In the instant case, the respondent is seeking enforcement of the liability of the petitioners created under Section 30 and 37 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 as the cause of action for the plaint is based on the dishonour of the said cheques. Since, the suit is not based on any contract between the parties, the bar under Section 69 (2) of the of the Indian Partnership Act,1932 would not apply.
In a case involving removal of inputs as such, CESTAT Ahmedabad has held that first-in first-out (FIFO) system must be applied and removal of inputs from the old stock of a manufacturer must be considered. t noted that that the quantity removed from time to time was carried forward from the old stock and the stock balance of the input was much more than the quantity cleared.
