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 September Day 29 - Wednesday

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

Newsletter: Where Service Meets Reader Approval.

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
September 29, 2021

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

GST Income Tax Customs Corporate Laws Service Tax CST, VAT & Sales Tax



Articles


News


Notifications


Circulars / Instructions / Orders


Highlights / Catch Notes

    GST

  • Blocking of input tax credit - Since the appellant-assessee did not have the benefit of the reasons on what ground the order under Rule 86-A was passed, the representation is only general in nature. Therefore, for an effective representation to be made the Appellant is entitled to know the reasons, based on which the power under Rule 86-A was invoked by the second respondent. - HC

  • Validity of order for levy of penalty - Principles of natural justice - The provision, that is, Section 75(4) of the Act, has mandated that, only an opportunity of hearing, that means one opportunity shall be given mandatorily to the Assessee for personal hearing - Such one opportunity had been given, and ultimately, the third opportunity also had been given to him on 30.12.2020, where he was permitted to file objection or reply and personal hearing was also given to him was utilised. - Petition dismissed. - HC

  • Income Tax

  • Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Unless these are decided and a finding is rendered, it cannot be held as to whether the reopening is valid or not. Since such an exercise has not been done by the learned Single Judge, we are inclined to interfere with the impugned order. This is more so unless and until such a finding is rendered, the Appellate Court cannot test the correctness of the findings. Therefore, in the absence of any such finding, the Appellate Court cannot be expected to convert itself into the Court of first instance and decide the writ petition on merits. - HC

  • Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition on account of addition under the head “Land Compensation and Rehabilitation Expenses” - mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and where no information given in the Return is found to be incorrect or inaccurate, the Assessee cannot be held guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars. - AT

  • Addition on account of loss in bardana - In such type of business the bardana is used to store goods like paddy, rice and rice bran etc. and again reused, the value of bardana deteriorate with passage of time and there is also wear and tear, therefore, the purchase price and the sale price of bardana cannot be the same. - the addition made on account of loss in bardana was not justified - AT

  • TP Adjustment - In our considered view the TPO and the AO are part of the income tax Department and therefore there has to be consistency in the approaches of both the authorities. As such the authorities should not take different stand while determining the taxable income of the assessee otherwise it would lead to the double addition which is not desirable under the provisions of the Act. - AT

  • Allowability of financial charges including interest expenditure - The assessee failed to produce documentary evidences, the end use of funds invested in subsidiary, fellow subsidiary, ultimate holding company and to others. - Further, assessee failed to prove that assessee had sufficient own funds for giving loans and advances and invested in shares and further, could not produce the availability of own funds on the date investments in shares and giving loans and advances on the particular date of investments - Thus the disallowance of interest made by the AO is justified - AT

  • Validity of the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 - eligibility of reason to believe - hawala transactions - borrowed satisfaction - the A.O in the backdrop of the information that was received by him from the Investigation wing, Mumbai had after due application of mind validly reopened the case of the assessee. Accordingly, finding no infirmity in the validity of the reopening of the assessee’s case u/s 147 - AT

  • VAT

  • Power of First Appellate Authority to change the character of the transaction - the correct interpretation to be given to clause (b) of Section 52(3) is to mean that the power is exercisable in the case of any other order which can be confirmed, canceled or varied, provided it does not change the character of the transaction nor the subject matter which was the issue before the Assessing Officer. - HC


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2021 (9) TMI 1191
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1190
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1189
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1187
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1180
  • Income Tax

  • 2021 (9) TMI 1186
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1184
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1183
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1182
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1179
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1178
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1177
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1175
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1174
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1172
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1171
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1170
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1169
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1168
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1167
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1166
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1165
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1164
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1163
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1162
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1161
  • Customs

  • 2021 (9) TMI 1188
  • Corporate Laws

  • 2021 (9) TMI 1160
  • Service Tax

  • 2021 (9) TMI 1176
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1173
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax

  • 2021 (9) TMI 1185
  • 2021 (9) TMI 1181
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates