You are not Logged in

Search Subject Wise

Search by Subject

       

SEARCH DETAIL

 
Section 47(6) Section 47(2) Section 46(3)(e) Rule 66(6)(ba) ... -- 2019 TaxPub(VAT) 0433 (Ker-HC) Hal International v. State of Kerala Ker-HC, O.T. Rev. No. 3 of 2019, 02-Jul-2019

Section 66(1) Section 22-A(1) Section 17(6) Section 5-B Section 17(7) ... -- 2019 TaxPub(VAT) 0462 (Karn-HC) S.V. Bandi v. Addl. CCT Karn-HC, Sales Tax Appeal No. 701/2011, 07-Dec-2018

Section 29 Assessment Waiver of pre-deposit Procurement of foodgrain -- Assessee was engaged in food grain procurement activity. It procures paddy from farmers and gives the same to Rice Millers for milling. As per agreement entered into between assessee and Millers, out of total paddy 67% of the shelled rice was to be supplied back to the assessee. Assessment of assessee was framed calculating an excess ITC. The said order was reassessed and a demand was raised including interest and penalty. Assessee filed appeal before Appellate Authority and insisted for waiver ......
2019 TaxPub(VAT) 0459 (P&H-HC) Punjab State Warehousing Corporation v. State of Punjab & Anr. P&H-HC, VATAP No. 135/2018 (O&M), 02-Jul-2019

Section 22 Assessment Validity Stock discrepancy Suppression of facts -- AO in his assessment order determined a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 4,82,375 against the reported total and taxable turnover of Rs. 1,18,525. Commissioner modifying the order of AO, ordered to delete the equal addition for probable omission, i.e., Rs. 1,03,730 at 5% and also ordered to confirm the actual stock difference for Rs. 1,03,730 at 5%. In respect of estimation on corresponding purchases, the equal addition for Rs. 78,195 was ordered to be deleted and the actual purchase suppressio......
2019 TaxPub(VAT) 0460 (Mad-HC) State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl. M. Parvathi Trading Company Mad-HC, T.C. No. 2 of 2018, 10-Jun-2019

Section 8 Payment of tax at compounded rate Cancellation of permission to pay tax at compounded rate by assessee -- Revenue in exercise of his powers under section 8(f), cancelled the permission to pay tax at compounded rate by assessee. Assessee appealed before Tribunal under section 60. Assessee first tried to convince this Court to keep in abeyance notice till appeal was heard and disposed of. Revenue opposed assessee|s request contending that the order under section 8 was independent to the notice issued under section 25. Staying proceedings which is independent in nature, does not go with the scheme of t......
2019 TaxPub(VAT) 0458 (Ker-HC) K. Viswanath v. State Tax Officer Ker-HC, W.P. (C) No. 9514/2019, 12-Jul-2019

Section 31 Rectification of mistake Mistake apparent from record Application of mind -- Issue arose under consideration as to whether Tribunal was legally justified in holding that while passing the original assessment order, assessing authority had applied the rate of tax after application of mind and the same could not be corrected under section 31 under the heading mistake apparent on the face of record. Held: Clearly, for a mistake to be rectified by AO, it had to be a mistake found in any order that may have been passed by him at an earlier point in time. For exercise of powe......
2019 TaxPub(VAT) 0457 (All-HC) CCT v. S/S Purwar Trading Co. All-HC, Sales/Trade Tax Revision Nos. 231-232 of 2019, 24-Jul-2019

Section 73 Demand Validity Show cause notice being vague and lacked details -- Assessee-company was issued show cause notice demanding service tax under the category of Business Auxiliary Service (BAS). CIT (A) also confirmed the demand under the said category. Assessee contended that the said show cause notice was liable to be set aside as it was vague and did not disclose reasons as to why the activities undertaken by it would cover under BAS. Further, it contended that it was obligatory for Revenue to specifically indicate in the show cause notice why the activities und......
2019 TaxPub(ST) 0927 (CESTAT-All) Micromatic Grinding Technologies Ltd. v. CCE & ST CESTAT-All, Service Tax Appeal No. 1175 of 2011/ALL, 16-Jul-2019

Notification No. 18/2009-ST Benefit of notification Exemption from service tax Benefit of Notification was denied on the ground that assessee had not filed the return in Form EXP-4 in due time -- Assessees were engaged in business of export of goods and were providing/receiving various taxable services such as |Business Auxiliary Services|, |Goods Transport Agency Service|, etc. Assessee with an intention to avail exemption from service tax under Notification No. 18/2009-ST, which was superseded by Notification No. 42/2012-ST. However, the benefit of Notification was denied to assessee on the ground that assessee had not filed the return in Form EXP-4 in due time. Held: Mere procedural......
2019 TaxPub(ST) 0919 (CESTAT-Del) HEG Ltd. v. Commr. of Cus., CE & ST CESTAT-Del, Service Tax Appeal No. 51339 of 2016/DEL-DB, 02-Jul-2019

Section 12 Section 12-B Rule 8-A Rule 12 ... -- 2019 TaxPub(VAT) 0441 (All-HC) Dinesh Oil Ltd. v. CTT All-HC, Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 1521 of 2007, 15-Jul-2019

Section 9 Section 74 Section 74(7) Section 74(8) Section 35 Section 35(2) Section 74(9) Section 74(7)(a) Section 38 Rule 56 ... -- 2019 TaxPub(VAT) 0455 (Del-HC) Mukesh Agencies v. CTT & Ors. Del-HC, W.P.(C) No. 13272/2018 & CM Appl. No. 51615/2018 (Direction), 25-Jul-2019