As AO failed to arrive at satisfaction as to non-correctness of assessee’s claim as regards no expenditure against exempt income, invocation of rule 8D was in contravention of section 14A(2) and, therefore, disallowance was deleted.
It is not in dispute that the assessee had been following LIFO method regularly for valuation of closing stock since its inception. It is not in dispute that the LIFO method adopted by the assessee had been accepted by the revenue in the past. It is not in dispute that the LIFO method is also one of the recognized methods for valuation of closing stock.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered company having its registered office at Gurugram, Haryana. The petitioner company is also registered under the GST Act, 2017 and is carrying on business of transportation of goods from one place to another.
S.B.G.C Logistics Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) In view of the decision taken by the Government that if the goods are transported within a distance of 50 km in the case of intra-state transaction, there is no requirement to fill up ‘Part B’. Notification no.12 of 2018 dated 07.03.2018 craves out an exception […]
SBI Cards & Payments Services Pvt Ltd Vs Rohidas Jadhav (Bombay High Court) Bombay High Court has recently accepted service of notice in an execution application through WhatsApp after noting that notice served in the form of a PDF file was not only delivered, but the attachment was opened as well. 1. The Respondent to […]
M/s. Real Image LLP Vs M/s. Qube Cinema Technologies Private Limited (NCLT) Legislative intention behind enacting both the LLP act 2008 and The Companies Act 2013 is to facilitate the ease of doing business and create a desirable business atmosphere for companies and LLPs. For this purpose, both the Acts have provided provisions for merger or amalgamation […]
Nila Infrastructure Limited vs. Surat Municipal Corporation (Gujarat High court) Non-payment of GST along with the bid fee to procure a tender would amount to non-compliance with the remittance of bid fee – bidder would be liable for disqualification- Gujarat High court FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT JUDGMENT / ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS: 1.0. […]
These are the appeals filed by assessee against the order of CIT(A)-16, Mumbai dated 14/08/2015 for A.Y.1997-98 and 2003-04, in the matter of imposition of penalty u/s.271 (1 )(c) of the IT Act.
It is seen that an identical matter has been disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 1802 of 2017, directing expeditious completion of the adjudication of the matter and permitting release of the goods detained pending adjudication, in terms of rule 140(1) of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
Goods mentioned under Group A fall under the definition of Agricultural Produce in terms of the aforesaid notification and so supply of cold storage service in relation to these is exempt from the levy of GST.
