Karnataka Authority of Advance Ruling M/s SLN Tech-Fabs(Bengaluru) Pvt. Ltd. 1. Presently we are charging GST 28% (CGST @ 14% + SGST @ 14%) as per Sl.No. 169 of Schedule-IV to the Notification No.1/2017-CT (R) dated 28.06.2017. Is it correct? 2. Can we use SAC 998881 (Notification No.11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, Sl.No.535 of Annexure?… Read More »
Karnataka Authority of Advance Ruling M/s Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd The applicant raises the objection for charging GST on the Electricity charges and questions the lessors about the legal authority/ source of law hence the application filed by the Applicant for advance ruling is here by rejected, in terms of Section 98(2) of the CGST… Read More »
Since the assessment proceedings no longer involve human interaction and is based on records alone, the assessment proceeding should have commenced much earlier so that before passing assessment order, the respondent assessing officer could have come to a definite conclusion on facts after fully understanding the nature of business of the petitioner. It appears that… Read More »
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax ASHOK BHUSHAN AND NAVIN SINHA, JJ. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11923 & 11924 OF 2018 FEBRUARY 7, 2020 JUDGMENT Ashok Bhushan, J. – By these appeals the assessee has challenged the judgment of the High Court of Delhi dated 07.12.2017 deciding the Income Tax Appeal No.31 of… Read More »
HIGH COURT OF DELHI Lakshmi Satyanarayana Dutt Tadikonda v. Union of India RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J. W.P. (CRL.) NO. 343 OF 2020 CRL. M.A. NO. 2540 OF 2020 FEBRUARY 12, 2020 N. Hiharan, Sr. Adv., Aman Panwar, Mudit Gupta, Harsh Gattani, Siddharth Yadav and Sharang Dhulia, Advs. for the Petitioner. Anil Soni, Devesh Dubey, Abhishek Maratha, Pratyaksh Gupta and Ms. Nupur Sharma, Advs. for the Respondent. ORDER 1. By way of… Read More »
In my considered view the impugned notices under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the proceedings under section 147 of the Act are not sustainable in law and should be quashed for the reason that admittedly impugned proceeding initiated under section 147 and notices issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961,… Read More »
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Ananda Social & Educational Trust v. Commissioner of Income tax S.A. BOBDE, CJI. B.R. GAVAI AND SURYA KANT, JJ. CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 5437-5438 OF 2012 FEBRUARY 19, 2020 ORDER Civil Appeal No(s).5437-5438/2012 We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the impugned Judgment(s) and Order(s) passed by the High Court… Read More »
It can be seen from clause 2, 7, 8, 9, 14 and 19 of the “Agreement for the Supply of Cellular Mobile Phones” between HCL and the assessee that relationship between the assessee and HCL is that of principal to principal and not that of principal to agent. The discount which was offered to distributors… Read More »
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai v. Saint Gobain Glass India Ltd. DR. VINEET KOTHARI AND R. SURESH KUMAR, JJ. TAX CASE (APPEAL) NO. 8 OF 2013 DECEMBER 2, 2019 DR.Vineet Kothari, J. – The Revenue has filed this Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act calling in question the correctness of the order… Read More »
The assessee is a habitual investor having portfolio of investment in shares in crores and is still holding investment in shares in several crores and is constantly engaged in investing in shares of various companies. IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH ‘A’ Anoop Jain v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-53(1), New Delhi BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL… Read More »