Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/lack-of-reasoning-non-consideration-of-reply-and-non-application-of-mind-delhi-hc-remands-gst-scn/479080/ The Court observed that the impugned Order has been passed by the Tax Officer in a cryptic and templated manner By Avinash Kurungot – On January
Category: Service Tax
*****CESTAT quashes Service Tax Demand for Belated SCN
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/time-barred-scn-cestat-quashes-service-tax-demand/478578/ Intentional suppression cannot be assumed merely because the appellant operated under self-assessment, disagreed with audit findings, claimed CENVAT credit eligibility, or failed to
1-👍👍👍👍👍👍👍Kerala HC Sets Aside Section 148 Order & Notice, Directs Fresh Order After Considering Petitioner’s Reply & Hearing
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/kerala-hc-sets-section-148-order-notice-directs-fresh-order-petitioners-reply-hearing.html Fathima Abu Vs PCIT (Kerala High Court) In the case of Fathima Abu Vs PCIT, the Kerala High Court set aside the order passed
1-👍👍👍👍👍👍👍Assessee missed notices due to litigation at DRT: ITAT Remands case to CIT(A)
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/assessee-missed-notices-due-litigation-drt-itat-remands-case-cita.html Saiganapath Hotel Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Bangalore has remitted the appeal filed by Saiganapath Hotel
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍Kerala HC Directs Reinstatement of Appeal, Grants Assessee One Week to Cure Defects
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/kerala-hc-directs-reinstatement-appeal-grants-assessee-week-cure-defects.html Arun Vijayan Pillai Vijai Vs Income Tax Officer Income Tax Department (Kerala High Court) In the case of Arun Vijayan Pillai Vijai Vs Income
👌👌👌👌👌Mere reporting in GST return doesn’t make amount taxable under Income Tax: ITAT Ahmedabad
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/mere-reporting-gst-return-doesnt-amount-taxable-income-tax-itat-ahmedabad.html ITO Vs Aman Enterprise (ITAT Ahmedabad) ITAT Ahmedabad held that mere reporting in the GST return doesn’t make the amount taxable as per
👌👌👌👌👌👌👌Reassessment Proceeding initiated after 6 years is not valid; Department must prove dispatch of notice
https://taxguru.in/income-tax/reassessment-proceeding-initiated-after-6-years-is-not-valid-department-must-prove-dispatch-of-notice.html M/s Ardent Steel Limited, Vs ACIT (Chhattisgarh High Court) A focused glance of the Section 149 provision would show that the maximum time limit
👌👌👌Service Tax Demand Cannot Be Solely Based on Oral Statements: CESTAT Ahmedabad
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/service-tax/service-tax-demand-solely-based-oral-statements-cestat-ahmedabad.html Krish Corporation Vs Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-Surat-i (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Demand cannot be raised solely based on the oral statement of witness without
ITAT Delhi Sets Aside Ex-Parte Order as Notices were never served to Assessee
Raj Rani Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) In the case of Raj Rani vs. Income Tax Officer (ITO), the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi bench set
👌👌👌👌👌Input tax credit eligible under section 16(5) and 16(6) of CGST Act: Gauhati HC
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/goods-and-service-tax/input-tax-credit-eligible-section-16-5-16-6-cgst-act-gauhati-hc.html Jyotirmoyee Drugs And Anr. Vs Union of India And 3 Ors. (Gauhati High Court) Gauhati High Court held that petitioner is entitled to
👌👌👌👌👌CESTAT sets aside Extended Service Tax Demand on Bed Roll Supply to Railways Due to Lack of Suppression of Fact
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/cestat-sets-aside-extended-service-tax-demand-on-bed-roll-supply-to-railways-due-to-lack-of-suppression-of-fact-read-order/454494/ The Bangalore Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside extended service tax demand on bed roll supply to Indian
👌CESTAT Rules Mere Non-Payment of Service Tax Not Suppression of fact
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/mere-non-payment-of-service-tax-not-suppression-of-fact-cestat-quashes-order-under-extended-limitation-read-order/453127/ The appellant referred to precedents where it was held that non-disclosure alone does not equate to suppression unless it is accompanied by deliberate
👌👌👌👌👌Patna HC rules GST Appellate Authority must consider Grounds raised in Memo even while Considering Appeal Ex-Parte
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/gst-appellate-authority-must-consider-grounds-raised-in-memorandum-even-while-considering-appeal-ex-parte-patna-hc/449734/ The Patna High Court ruled that the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) appellate authority must consider the grounds raised in the
Passing of ex-parte order without deciding case on merits untenable: ITAT Visakhapatnam
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/passing-ex-parte-order-deciding-case-merits-untenable-itat-visakhapatnam.html 14Anuradha Reddy Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) ITAT Visakhapatnam held that dismissal of appeal and passing of ex-parte order by CIT(A) in absence of
👌👌👌👌👌Granting opportunity to cross examine essential as addition based on 3rd party statement: ITAT Bangalore
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/granting-opportunity-cross-examine-essential-addition-based-3rd-party-statement-itat-bangalore.html Smt. Rekha Ganesh Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) ITAT Bangalore held that granting an opportunity to cross examine essential when addition is made on
👌👌👌Personal Hearing Mandatory U/s. 75(4) Before Passing of Orders: Allahabad HC
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/goods-and-service-tax/personal-hearing-mandatory-section-754-passing-orders-allahabad-hc.html Summary: In the case of M/s. Eveready Industries India Limited v. State of UP, the Allahabad High Court addressed the requirement of personal hearings under
Summary of show cause notice cannot substitute requirement of notice u/s. 73: Gauhati HC
Read more at: https://taxguru.in/goods-and-service-tax/summary-show-notice-substitute-requirement-notice-u-s-73-gauhati-hc.htmlCopyright © Taxguru.in Passing of ex-parte order without considering merits of case unjustified: Matter restored
👌👌👌Passing of ex-parte order without considering merits of case unjustified: Matter restored
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/passing-ex-parte-order-merits-case-unjustified-matter-restored.html Ambika Prashad Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) ITAT Chandigarh held that passing of an ex-parte order by CIT(A) without considering the merits of the
GST demand orders cannot be passed without issuance of SCN: Jharkhand HC
Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/goods-and-service-tax/gst-demand-orders-passed-issuance-scn-jharkhand-hc.html Prity Dokania sole proprietor of M/s Samridhi Enterprises Vs State of Jharkhand (Jharkhand High Court) In the case of Prity Dokania Vs State of
Issuance of single consolidate notice u/s. 73 for multiple assessment year contravenes CGST Act: Karnataka HC
lipped from: https://taxguru.in/goods-and-service-tax/issuance-single-consolidate-notice-u-s-73-multiple-assessment-year-contravenes-cgst-act-karnataka-hc.html Bangalore Golf Club Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka High Court) Karnataka High Court held that the practice of issuing a single,
aniltikotekar4sme.com 