‘Disc Brake Pads’ manufactured and supplied by the Applicant are classified under Heading 87083000 and covered under SI. No. 170 of Schedule IV of Notification No. 01/2017 CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and SI.No. 170 of Schedule IV of G.O. (Ms) No. 62 dated 29.06.2017 No. ll(2)/CTR/532(d-4)/2017 attracting 14% CGST/14% SGST respectively.
In re Erode Manjal Vanigarkal Matrum Kidangu Urimaiyalargal Sangam (GST AAR Tamil Nadu) Agent, who is a member of the applicant stores the turmeric in their godown, the sales of which is as per the guidelines of EMC. Also from the invoices furnished, it is seen that the invoice is raised by the agent on the […]
In re M/s Amalgamations Valeo Clutch Private Limited (GST AAR Tamilnadu) The applicant vide their letter dated 09.08.2018 has referred to the PH posted on 07.08.2018 in connection with the subject application seeking a ruling on the aspect of amortization. They have stated that subsequent to their application, a circular No.47/21/2018-GST dated 08.06.2018 has been […]
The petitioner seeks a declaration that sub-rule (2) of Rule 5A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 as substituted by notification no. 23/24/ST dated December 25, 2014 is arbitrary and in conflict with provisions of Section 72A of the Finance Act, 1994. The petitioner also seeks a declaration that, the provisions of clause (k) of subsection (2) of Section 94 of the Finance Act, 1994 is unguided and gives uncontrolled power of delegation. The third prayer is with regard to a notice dated February 16, 2015.
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) passed a final order imposing penalty on Panasonic Energy India Co. Limited Panasonic) and Geep Industries (India) Private Limited (Geep) for colluding to fix prices of zinc-carbon dry cell batteries in India. In respect of Panasonic, CCI granted 100 percent reduction in penalty by invoking the provisions of Section 46 of the Competition Act, 2002 (the Act) read with the Competition Commission of India (Lesser Penalty) Regulations, 2009 (Lesser Penalty Regulations).
M/s Viraat Traders Vs State of Punjab and others (Punjab and Haryana HC) Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 23.05.2018 passed by Excise and Taxation Officer Ludhiana-3 cancelling the registration of the petitioner under the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short ‘the Punjab GST Act’) It is not […]
Finding of AO is based merely on suspicion and surmises without any tangible material to show that the assessee has introduced his own unaccounted income in the share of long term capital gain even otherwise the reliance of the statements recorded by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata wherein without giving an opportunity of cross examination is a complete violation of principles of natural justice
M/s. Balaji Construction Company Vs state Of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court) It is stated that the petitioner had applied well in time for registration under the GST Act to enable him to migrate within a specific time period. In spite of various reminders, the concerned authorities have not completed the process of migration and now […]
CIT, Ghaziabad Vs. Hapur Pilkhuwa Development Authority (Supreme Court) The Supreme Court on Monday imposed a fine of Rs. 10 Lakh on the Income Tax Department for its casual approach and for giving a totally misleading statement in the case. This petition for special to leave has been filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad. First […]
Vogue Vestures Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dy. CIT (ITAT Bangalore) This issue was now covered by the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Mark Auto Industries Ltd (2013) 358 ITR 43 (P&H). wherein the High court held that in absence of any requirements in law for making deduction of […]
