Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Tax Updates - TMI e-Newsletters

Home e-Newsletters Index Year 2021 June Day 16 - Wednesday

TMI e-Newsletters FAQ
You need to Subscribe a package.

Newsletter: Where Service Meets Reader Approval.

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
June 16, 2021

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

GST Income Tax Customs Corporate Laws Insolvency & Bankruptcy Service Tax Central Excise Indian Laws



Highlights / Catch Notes

    GST

  • Classification of services - Works Contract - activities of construction - The Proposed Modus operandi for construction of ‘Unit’ which is ‘other than affordable residential apartments’ by the applicant in the RREP promoted by them, namely, ‘Ashiana Shubam -Phase IV’ in Maraimalai Nagar Chennai is classifiable under SAC 9954 as ‘Construction Service’ and the applicable rate of tax is CGST @ 3.75% and SGST @ 3.75% - AAR

  • Scope of Advance Ruling application - Classification of goods - it is seen that the classification of the a products and the applicable rate under GST has been decided vide proceedings under Section 60 of the Act, in the case of the applicant. - As per first Proviso to Section 98 (2) of the Act, the present application seeking ruling on the applicable rate on the same products for which the classification and applicable rate stands decided, is not admissible - Application not maintainable. - AAR

  • Income Tax

  • Levying the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - Just for making wrong claims made advertently or inadvertently, therefore, penalty cannot be levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act and further the Lower Authorities have not given any findings regarding either “concealment of income” or “furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income” by the assessee. We are of the considered view, this is not a fit case for imposing penalty - AT

  • LTCG on compulsory acquisition - In the absence of notification the benefit under section 96 of RFCTLARR Act 2013, cannot be extended to the assessee. In our view the exemption is required to be specifically granted by the statute and it cannot be inferred or drawn. It is the duty of the assessee to make out his case unequivocally, if wanted to get the benefit of exemption that the exemption provided under section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act 2013 is applicable to the assessee.Therefore, the assessee is not liable to pay income tax for long-term capital gain. Needful has not been done by the assessee either before the lower authority or before us. - AT

  • Powers conferred to CIT(A) u/s 251 - CIT(A) power to direct the AO for issuance of notice u/s 148 - In the present case, Ld.CIT(A) annulled the assessment and further directed to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act. No such power has been granted by the Act, therefore, the impugned direction of Ld.CIT(A) in excess of the jurisdiction conferred by section 251 of the Act, hence the same is set aside. - AT

  • Penalty levied u/s. 271G - nternational transactions - assessee ignoring the provisions of Section 92D of the Act as well as Rule 10D of the Income Tax Rules - Section 273B of the Act provides for reasonable cause and if that is justified, penalty/s. 271G of the Act may not be imposed and when this opportunity is given to the assessee by the statutes itself and the assessee has explained the reasonable causes which was accepted by the Ld. CIT(Appeal) and after perusing such reasons, we are in conformity with the findings of the Ld. CIT(Appeals). - AT

  • Exemption u/s 11 - salary payments to the specified persons u/s 13(3) - As the salary had been paid to the specified persons against the services provided by them the income from salary had been shown in their individual return of income and nothing is brought on record by the A.O. to substantiate that any extra salary was paid for the administrative function and that the salary was excessive in comparison to any similar case, therefore, the disallowance made by the A.O. was rightly deleted by the ld. CIT(A). - AT

  • Revision u/s 263 - The revenue is disputing on non conduct of enquiry, but we find the assessee firm has discharged its burden of proof on submitting the vital requisite details called for by the assessing officer by issue of statutory notice U/sec 142(1) of the Act along with the questioner which cannot be over looked. Since the information was available with the A.O in the course of the assessment, the A.O. has considered the facts, submissions and evidences filed and took a view. - AT

  • Indian Laws

  • Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - presumption of service of notice - The complaint should have been filed by 03.12.12, Admittedly, the complaint was filed on 19.11.2012 and therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that no proceedings under Section 138 of the Act could be drawn against the applicant. The Magistrate at the stage of summoning has only to see whether a prima facie case is made out or not - The factum of disputed service of notice requires adjudication on the basis of evidence and the same can only be done and appreciated by the trial court and not by this Court under the jurisdiction conferred by Section 482 Cr.P.C. - HC

  • Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - It is true that the burden of proof on the accused to rebut the presumption is only of preponderance of probabilities and not proof beyond reasonable doubt - But even then the accused has failed to probabalise his defence and therefore, the complainant is successful in proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. - HC

  • Service Tax

  • Interest on delayed refund - relevant date - The non-payment of refund to the applicant claimant within three months from the date of such application or in the case governed by proviso to Section 11BB, non-payment within three months from the date of the commencement of Section 11BB brings in the starting point of liability to pay interest, notwithstanding the date on which decision has been rendered by the competent authority as to whether the amount is to be transferred to Welfare Fund or to be paid to the applicant needs no interference. - AT


Articles


Notifications


Circulars / Instructions / Orders


News


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2021 (6) TMI 481
  • 2021 (6) TMI 480
  • 2021 (6) TMI 478
  • 2021 (6) TMI 473
  • 2021 (6) TMI 472
  • 2021 (6) TMI 471
  • 2021 (6) TMI 470
  • Income Tax

  • 2021 (6) TMI 479
  • 2021 (6) TMI 463
  • 2021 (6) TMI 461
  • 2021 (6) TMI 460
  • 2021 (6) TMI 459
  • 2021 (6) TMI 458
  • 2021 (6) TMI 457
  • 2021 (6) TMI 456
  • 2021 (6) TMI 455
  • 2021 (6) TMI 454
  • 2021 (6) TMI 453
  • 2021 (6) TMI 452
  • 2021 (6) TMI 451
  • 2021 (6) TMI 449
  • 2021 (6) TMI 447
  • 2021 (6) TMI 446
  • 2021 (6) TMI 445
  • 2021 (6) TMI 444
  • 2021 (6) TMI 443
  • 2021 (6) TMI 442
  • 2021 (6) TMI 440
  • 2021 (6) TMI 439
  • Customs

  • 2021 (6) TMI 474
  • Corporate Laws

  • 2021 (6) TMI 448
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy

  • 2021 (6) TMI 441
  • Service Tax

  • 2021 (6) TMI 462
  • Central Excise

  • 2021 (6) TMI 450
  • Indian Laws

  • 2021 (6) TMI 477
  • 2021 (6) TMI 476
  • 2021 (6) TMI 475
  • 2021 (6) TMI 469
  • 2021 (6) TMI 468
  • 2021 (6) TMI 467
  • 2021 (6) TMI 466
  • 2021 (6) TMI 465
  • 2021 (6) TMI 464
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates