M/s Aditya Enterprise Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) In the instant case, the profit was determined on estimated basis due to the fact that assessee failed to produce books of account during the assessment. Once then profit has been determined on estimated basis then in our considered view no disallowance can be made on account of […]
M/s Inspectorate Singapore Pte. Ltd. Vs ADIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee was under the belief that due to the ‘make available’ Clause in Article 12 (4) (b) of India Singapore DTAA, the consideration paid by the Indian customers to assessee cannot be regarded as ‘fees for technical services’ and further since there was no transfer of technology […]
Whether GST is applicable on Reimbursement of salary on behalf of foreign entity? Applicant will not be liable to pay GST on Salary amount received from RMS and disbursed to the Crew.
ITAT had held that there is no principal-agent relationship between the bank issuing the bank guaranee of the assessee. The ITAT Mumbai Bench had further noted that while it is termed as |guarantee commission|, the same is not in the nature of commission
Commissioner of Central Tax GST Vs Team HR Services Ltd. (Delhi High Court) The mere advertence to the possibility of service tax – without any material or evidence – or even a finding that such service tax had been collected by the assessee during the past, cannot per se amount to a conclusion that it […]
A two-judge bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has asked the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) to issue a clarification regarding the leviability of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) on the goods supplied through the duty-free shops in the International Airports in India.
Bengali Lal & Sons Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri R.C. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondents no. 5 and 6 as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents no. 1 to 4. The petitioner is a partnership firm and had applied for registration under […]
Penalty u/s.271E was not leviable as the belief of assessee that return of advance from customers was not prohibited by section 269T was a bonafide belief.
ACIT Vs M/s Om Metal Infraproject Ltd. (ITAT Jaipur) Clause (iic) inserted in Explanation 1 to section 115JB by the Finance Act, 2015 is remedial and curative in nature as it was brought in the statute to provide similar benefit to the member of the AOP which was earlier applicable to the partner of the […]
M/s Hero Moto Corp Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) As regards to Ground, relating to disallowance of cost of scrap material amounting to Rs.6.34 lacs, it can be seen that in the course of the business of manufacturing, the process generates some scrap on account of rejection of components, obsolescence of components, etc. In the […]
