M/s M.K. Enterprises v. State of U.P. & 3 Others (Allahabad High Court) Assessee was not given any opportunity to show cause or give reply to the allegation on which goods had been seized on account of absence of Transit Declaration Form (TDF), it was held that as the petitioner had no notice or opportunity […]
Manu International Vs. State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Penalty should not be imposed where the assessee is unable to file the GST returns and pay the taxes for technical issues relating to migration. The petitioner is a registered partnership firm under the U.P. VAT Act, 2008. On the enforcement of the GST, it applied […]
Natthani Infrastructures Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that petitioner has made an application on 05.04.2018 before the respondent authorities for reimbursement of additional Goods and Services Tax (GST) liability on civil contract and work order issued prior to implementation of Goods and Services Tax Act, […]
Shri Jafrudin Kaji Vs The ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) It is an undisputed fact that the assessee sold land for Rs.72 lakhs as evident from the sale deed. Therefore, the argument of the learned counsel for the assessee that the amount of cash deposits represents the sale consideration of agriculture land is without any substance. However, […]
Discounting charges are outside the purview of interest expenses, therefore, in our considered view, the question of making any disallowance on account of non-deduction of TDS on such discounting charges does not arise.
TCG Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) In the present case, the requisite details as specified in Clause (B) of sub-rule 2 of rule 3 of Income Tax Rules 1962 were not maintained by the assessee and this being the undisputed position, we find ourselves in agreement with the authorities below that the value […]
In re Visvesvaraya National Institute Of Technology (GST AAR Maharashtra) We find that in the present application as per submissions made before us, the applicant is recipient of service and not service providers and also that these services are not under reverse charge mechanism. The notification as referred by them, is applicable to provider of […]
When such extraction of toddy is carried on from the trees belonging to the members of the Society, it is definitely an agricultural produce grown by its members. Vending of such produce grown by its members even under a regulatory regime would be marketing of an agricultural produce.
M A Zahid Vs ACIT (Karnataka High Court) In this case First and foremost the petitioner is not accused of committing any non-bailable offence so as to invoke the jurisdiction under section 438 of Cr.P.C. Secondly, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner is also without any basis. As could be seen from the above Rules, […]
Recipient of the service Odisha Knowledge Corporation Limited (OKCL) is a body corporate which cannot be regarded as Government. Therefore, the activities of the applicant by way of supply, of goods and services under the ICT project are not covered under Entry 72 of the notification no.12/2017 dated 28.06.2017, to be entitled to the benefit of exemption from GST.
