Follow Us:

Judiciary

Marine propellers, rudder set, stern tube set, propeller / M.S. Shaft for couplings used in fishing / floating vessels are taxable @ 5% GST

May 29, 2018 1128 Views 0 comment Print

In re M/s. Saraswathi Metal Industries (AAR Kerala) Commodities such as marine propellers, rudder set, stern tube set, propeller shaft and M.S. Shaft for couplings used as a part of fishing / floating vessels would come under the Entry 252 of Schedule 1 of Notification No. 01/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and State Notification […]

Govt/Authority providing services to other Govt/Authority is exempted from GST: AAR

May 29, 2018 4779 Views 0 comment Print

Now the issue to be decided whether the services received by the applicant from IIT, Mumbai is liable to GST or not In this context, we find that serial no. B of Part 3 of GST Tariff- Services [ Chapter 99] provides the list of nil rated/ fully exempted services. On going through the said list, we find that Government/Authority providing services to other Government/Authority is exempted from GST.

5% GST on Implants for joint replacements falling under HSN Code 90213100

May 29, 2018 19575 Views 0 comment Print

In re Shri. Gopal Gireesh, Veena Chemicals (AAR Kerala) On a plain reading of entry at Serial No. E(9) of List 3 of Entry 257 of Schedule I and entry at Serial No. 221 of Schedule II of Notification No. 01/2017 -Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, it is evident that joint replacements are specifically covered […]

For the period up to 31/05/2007, No service tax payable in respect of composite construction works contracts

May 29, 2018 1029 Views 0 comment Print

Ganesh Narayan Sharma Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Delhi) I. The construction works executed by the appellant were rendered under composite contracts which involved both rendering of service as well as supply of goods and hence such contracts are in the nature of works contracts. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Larsen & […]

Actual service by each of individuals need not be established for claiming commission on sale and purchase of land

May 29, 2018 951 Views 0 comment Print

These appeals are filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) challenging the orders dated 17.03.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru, in ITA No.613/Bang/2014 and ITA No.614/Bang/2014

No penalty for Wrong claim of depreciation by crediting capital subsidy to reserves instead of reducing from actual cost/ WDV

May 28, 2018 2121 Views 0 comment Print

The action of the lower authorities in not following the case laws on the issue and in spite of legal precedents, still not quashing the penalty of Rs. 2,22,240/- is unjust, illegal, arbitrary, illusory and against the facts of the case and thus deserves to be deleted.

Tribunal cannot direct Registration U/s. 12AA in absence of satisfaction of Registering Authority

May 28, 2018 990 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs A.R. Trust (Allahabad High Court) Section 12 AA of the Act provides that the Registering Authority after satisfying himself about the objects of the Trust and genuineness of its activities shall pass an order in writing for registration of the Trust or to refuse the registration. Therefore, satisfaction of the Registering Authority is […]

HC grants relief to Cricketer Cheteshwar Pujara in Service Tax related case

May 28, 2018 1437 Views 0 comment Print

The petitioner is an Indian citizen. He is a businessman and says that he plays international cricket representing India. He also plays domestic cricket. He participated in what is known as Indian Premier League (IPL). He was one of the players chosen by the franchisee Knight Riders Sports Private Limited. This franchisee is owner of one team in the IPL, namely, Kolkata Knight Riders. An agreement of 21 st April, 2008 with the petitioner was executed by this franchisee.

No penalty u/s 271B if appellant had bonafide belief

May 28, 2018 3243 Views 0 comment Print

Hon’ble Kolkata ITAT has deleted penalty u/s 271B in the case of Dr. Shantanu Datta in I.T.A. No. 261/Kol/2017 as there was a bona fide belief entertained by the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case and the same constituted a reasonable cause for the failure of the assessee to comply with the requirement of section 44AB.

HC ask CBDT to Reconsider practice of appointing retired revenue officers as panel counsel

May 28, 2018 1389 Views 0 comment Print

Principal CIT vs. Grasim Industries Ltd (Bombay High Court) We understand that while appointing panel Advocates for the Revenue, the requirement of having practiced for some number of years is not insisted upon in case a person has domain expertise, such as retired Officers of Revenue. If this indeed be the practice, it would, in […]

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031