Tax
Donation By One Trust To Other Charitable Institution Out Of Accumulated Fund Is Hit By Explanation To Sec 11(2) R/w/s 11(3)(D) & Hence Taxable: Delhi ITAT
While explaining Section 11(3) of the Income tax Act, the New Delhi ITAT held that any income referred to u/s 11(2) which is paid to any trust/ institution registered u/s 12AA or to any fund/ trust/ university/ educational institution/ hospital referred to u/s 10(23C)(v) shall be deemed to be the income of such person of the previous year in which it is so applied or ceases to be so accumulated or set apart or ceases to remain so invested or deposited or credited or paid, as the case may...
Union Finance Minister Administers Oath Of Office To Justice (Retd.) Sanjaya Kumar Mishra As First President Of GSTAT in New Delhi
The Union Finance Minister Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman administers Oath of Office to Justice (Retd.) Sanjaya Kumar Mishra as the first President of Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) in New Delhi.Justice (Retd.) Mishra's appointment marks the beginning of the operationalisation of the GSTAT, a crucial body for resolving GST-related disputes.In order to offer a uniform framework for the settlement of disputes under the GST, the Principal Bench will be established in...
No Penalty U/s 271B Can Be Levied If There Is Reasonable Cause For Failure In Timely Furnishing Tax Audit Report: Delhi ITAT
The New Delhi ITAT held that Section 44AB of the Income tax Act casts an obligation upon the assessee to get accounts audited before the specified date and furnish by that date the report of such audit. However, finding that there was reasonable cause for failure in furnishing the Tax Audit Report in time, the ITAT clarified that the present case is not a case of not getting the accounts audited in time, and therefore, held that the penalty u/s 271B is not exigible The Bench of Dr....
Amount Deposited During Demonetization Does Not Call For Addition U/s 69A If Source Of Deposit Was Sufficiently Explained: Rajkot ITAT
Finding that the assessee has explained the details of the earning of the amount which was rightly deposited during the demonetization period, the Rajkot ITAT held that the addition confirmed by the CIT(A) u/s 69A of the Income tax Act is not justified. Section 69A lays down that if, in any financial year, the assessee is found to be the owner of any money, bullion, jewellery, or another valuable article, and such money, etc., is not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained...
I-T Authority Fails To Consider Reason For Difference In Sale Consideration & Stamp Duty: Mumbai ITAT Deletes Penalty Levied U/s 270A For Under-Reporting Of Income
Noting that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) have taken into consideration the explanation offered by the Assessee during the assessment proceedings in relation to the difference in the sale consideration and the stamp duty valuation of immovable property, the Mumbai ITAT deleted the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Income tax Act for under-reporting of income. The ITAT clarified that Section 270A(6)(a) excludes from the ambit of under-reported income, the amount of income...
Differences In Opinion of Approved Valuer Regarding Fixation Of Value Of Particular Property Can't Be Termed As Concealment: Chennai ITAT Deletes Penalty
The Chennai ITAT held that assessee's claim on the fair market value cannot be termed as concealment of income, if such claim was based on the valuation report of an approved valuer. The Bench of Manjunatha. G (Accountant Member) and Manomohan Das (Judicial Member) observed that “The basis of the assessee's claim is the report of the approved valuer. Further, differences of opinion will always be there regarding the fixation of value of a particular property. Showing of different...
Refusal By JBVNL To Reimburse Contractor GST Impact On Indirect Transactions Violative Of Article 14: Jharkhand High Court
The Jharkhand High Court has held that the action of Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam (JBVNL) offends Article 14 of the Constitution of India by refusing to reimburse contractor GST impact on indirect transactions.“This is a settled law that the state and its instrumentalities are required to demonstrate fair play in action. In “ABL International Ltd. and Another,"17 the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that even in contractual matters, the state and its instrumentalities are required to follow the...
Indirect Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 28 April To 4 May 2024
Supreme Court Supreme Court Seeks Data Of GST Arrests, Says Citizens' Harassment Won't Be Allowed Due To Any Ambiguity In Arrest Provisions Case Title: Radhika Agarwal v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(Crl.) No. 336/2018 (and connected matters) While hearing a batch of petitions challenging penal provisions of GST Act, Customs Act, etc. as non-compatible with the CrPC and the Constitution, the Supreme Court on Thursday (May 2) expressed concerns about the ambiguity in Section 69...
Service Recipient Not Liable For Seller's Default: Calcutta High Court Directs Dept. To 1st Proceed Against Supplier
The Calcutta High Court has held that the adjudicating authority, without resorting to any action against the supplier, who is the selling dealer, ignored the tax invoices produced by the appellant as well as the certificates issued by the Chartered Accountants, which are erroneous and wholly without jurisdiction.The bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya has observed that even in the show-cause notice, the authority has admitted that "it is true that the...
Indirect Tax Cases Monthly Round Up: April 2024
Supreme Court Supreme Court Expunges Gujarat HC's Adverse Observation Against GST Officials Case Title: The State Of Gujarat & Anr. V. Paresh Nathalal Chauhan Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 295 The Supreme Court (on March 12) expunged the observations made by the Gujarat High Court in an interim order that statutory protection of the good faith clause under Section 157 of the Goods and Services Tax Act may not be available to the GST officers who conducted a search...
Allahabad High Court Monthly Tax Digest: April 2024
INDEXM/S United Spirits Limited v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 222The Commissioner, Commercial Tax U.P. v. M/S Godfrey Philips India Limited 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 223 M/S Eco Plus Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 224Commissioner, Commercial Tax v. S/S Soma Enterprises Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 225Durga Steel Rolling Mills Thru. Partner Amit Arora v. Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes UP Lucknow 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 228Dipak Kumar Agarwal v. Assessing Officer...
Direct Tax Cases Monthly Round Up: April 2024
Delhi High Court Income Tax Addition Made Towards Unsubstantiated Share Capital Is Eligible For Section 80-IC Deduction: Delhi High Court Case Title: Valley Iron & Steel Co.Ltd Versus PCIT The Delhi High Court has held that income tax additions made towards unsubstantiated share capital are eligible for deduction under Section 80-IC of the Income Tax Act. Delhi High Court Quashes Initiation Of Section 153C Assessment Proceedings Falling Beyond Maximum 10 Years Block...