Understand the classification dispute resolved by the GST AAAR West Bengal regarding the services provided by an educational promotion company under the GST Act.
Ld. Advocate submits that the amounts collected from the tenants / lessees would only be in the nature of collection of reimbursable expenses and the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of UOI Vs Intercontinental Technocrafts Pvt. Ltd. – 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC) will apply.
Section 13 comes into play at the time of granting exemption under section 11 and not at the time of granting registration under section 12AA, therefore, CIT was not justified in denying registration on the ground that assessee trust had not got its account audited and not filed its return of income for preceding years.
In this case Since the rice mill owned by the assessee was let out to another rice mill and the rental income was received without carrying on any business activity or rendering any services incidental to carrying on the rice mill, therefore, the AO rightly assessed the income under the head ‘Income from other sources’.
The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 13.10.2017 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant.
Flipkart India (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) Where the assessee sold goods at loss in order to create market for itself, AO disregarded the loss without any basis and converted the same into income then action of AO was not justified. What can be taxed is only income that accrues or arises as laid […]
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) could be levied where AO was not sure about the charge on which penalty was to be levied since he had initiated penalty proceedings for both the charges, i.e., furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income as well as concealment of particulars of income, and also levied the penalty on both the charges vide his penalty order.
The original authority rejected the refund claim on the ground that only photocopies of the Bills of Entry, TR6 challans and sales invoices were produced by the appellant. Thus, for want of production of original documents, refund claim was rejected, which was later upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). Hence this appeal.
No addition can be made solely on the basis of a retracted statement made during the survey operation, particularly, when proper justification for retraction was also offered.
If no tax is deductible under section 195(1), section 40(a)(i) of the IT Act will not come in the way of the appellant claiming such deduction from its income: Barclays Bank Plc case
