Latest Statutes

The tax was not paid by the petitioner Company in the Government account within the due date, and accordingly it is a case of tax not being paid, within the period prescribed, or when due. In that view of the matter, the High Court did not accept the contention of the Revenue that no show-cause notice was required to be given in this case.

Godavari Commodities Ltd. v. UOI

  Section 73 of CGST Act, 2017   GST
What had been transferred by non-resident assessee was neither copyright in software nor the use of copyright in the software, but right to use copyrighted material or article clearly distinct from rights in a copyright and same did not give rise to any royalty income. Regarding applicability of amendment in section 9(1)(vi) brought out by Finance Act, 2012, any change made to domestic law to rectify a situation of mistaken interpretation could not bring about a unilateral legislative amendment into DTAA concluded between two sovereign States, therefore, section 9(1)(vi) as amended was not applicable to assessee’s case and there could be no taxability in India.

DCIT v Qliktech International AB

  Section 9(1)(vi)   Direct Taxes
Provisions of section 271(1)(c) are penal in nature and has to be strictly construed. These cannot be extended by way of liberal interpretation to include the cases, which otherwise, do not fall within the purview and scope of section 271(1)(c). In view of this, since income of Rs. 41 lakhs had already been declared in revised return, which was valid and filed within the limitation period prescribed for filing the same, hence, penalty in respect of aforesaid declared income was not leviable.

Gajjan Singh Thind v. ACIT

  Section 271(1)(c)   Direct Taxes
The appellant was not entitled to avail the ITC of GST paid on goods and services used for construction of Tie-in pipelines, from the FSRU to the National grid as per the provision laid out in section 17(5)(c) and 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act, 2017.

Western Concessions (P) Ltd., In re

  Section 100 of MGST Act, 2017   GST
Though AO had issued notice under section 148 on 26-3-2014, i.e., within period of six years from the end of relevant assessment year, however, it was returned unserved by postal authorities and even notice by affixture was also served on 4-4-2014 and there was no report of AO containing names and addresses of witnesses having identified the property, therefore, in the absence of section 148 notice served within stipulated period, reassessment proceedings were invalid.

B.M. Land Developers & Builders v. ITO

  Section 147   Direct Taxes
In the absence of any reasonable cause for failure of assessee in furnishing the information called for by the AO, penalty under section 271(1)(b) was rightly levied by AO for non-compliance of notice issued under section 142(1).

Sad Bhawna Trust v. Asstt. CIT

  Section 271(1)(b)   Direct Taxes
The High Court held that the reasons shown in the detention notices were not sufficient for the purposes of detaining the goods in terms of section 129 of the CGST/SGST Act.

Haier Appliances India (P) Ltd. v. Asstt. STO

  Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017   GST
The assessee had complied with conditions for grant of deduction under sections 54B inasmuch as he has utilised, within a period of two years from the date of transfer of capital asset, the capital gain in purchasing another land for being used for agricultural purposes, therefore, mere fact that assessee did not get legal title to the land could not be ground to deny benefit of deduction under sections 54B.

Chinnappa Anthonappa v. Asstt. CIT

  Section 54B   Direct Taxes
Provision of section 45(3) are exhaustive and does not confer any power on the AO to adopt consideration different from what is recorded in the books of account of the firm. Thus, AO was not correct in adopting the market value of land as revalued subsequently by the firm in the books of account. Further, provisions of section 45(3) are special provisions as these deem value of consideration which otherwise is not computable under general law and it is applicable to the specific situations of introduction of capital by partner to the firm and whereas the provisions of section 50C are general in nature and applicable whether consideration is known and determinate. Thus, when there is a specific provision in the statute to deal with a particular kind of transaction, then it would prevail over general provisions.

Sarrangan Ashok v. ITO

  Section 45(3)   Direct Taxes
The proposed activity of setting-up of the data centre facilities as explained would qualify as works contract as per section 2(119) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and section 2 (119) of the Karnataka Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The rate of tax applicable is 9% CGST and 9% SGST as per Entry No. 3(ii) of Notification 11/ 2017-Central Tax (Rate), dt. 28-6-2017.

Hewlett Packard Enterprise India (P.) Ltd., In re

  Section 97 of KGST Act, 2017   GST
1 2