Judgements and Orders, Supreme Court and High courts of India
The Hon'ble AAR Haryana in M/s. KSC Buildcon Private Limited [Advance Ruling No. HAR/HAAR/R/2019-20/26 decided on August 28, 2020] observed that major part of the contract involves earthwork (more than 75%) provided to a Government Entity. Hence, the
The Hon'ble Sikkim High Court in M/s.Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. UOI &Ors. [I.A. No.03 of 2020 in WP(C) No.47 of 2018 (dated November 2, 2020)] rejected the application filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Proce
The petitioner is a dealer in two wheelers. He was an assesseeregistered under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The petitioner washaving input tax credit to the tune of Rs.4,85,684/-. Following the introductionof GST regime, transition and migra
Steel products were supplied by the respondent to one M/s.Diamond Engineering Pvt. Ltd. [“the company”] from 21.09.2015 to11.11.2016, as a result of which INR 24,20,91,054/- was due and payableby the company. As many as 51 cheques were issued by the
By its judgment dated 24 October 2019, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal2 held that a person who is ineligible under Section 29A of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 20163 to submit a resolution plan, is also barred from proposing a scheme of
The Hon'ble AAR Rajasthan in M/s. Jeet & Jeet Glass and Chemicals Private Limited[Advance Ruling No.RAJ/AAR/2020-21/08 decided on August 24, 2020] held that the activity of job work consisting of bullet proof body building on the motor vehicles provi
The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in M/s. Anandeshwar Traders v. State of UP [Writ Tax No. 503 of 2020 decided on January 18, 2021] held that the order demanding tax and penalty passed by Revenue under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services
Bombay HC stayed the demand notice seeking Service Tax from Advocate
Bimal Jain 30 March 2021 at 09:51
The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Sanjiv Madhusudan Shah v. Assistant Commissioner of Central and Service Tax and ors. [Writ Petition (L) No. 646 of 2021 dated January 12, 2021] has stayed a demand notice issued, seeking to levy service tax upon an Ad
Present appeal by the assessee has been filed by assessee against order dated 12/03/2019 and 18/03/2019 passed by CIT(A)-7, Bengaluru respectively for assessment years 2010-11 & 2014-15.
The assessee has filed these three appeals challenging the orders passed by Ld CIT(A)-12, Bengaluru and they relate to the assessment years 2002-03, 2008-09 and 2009-10.
CAclubindia
