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 2020 August Day 20 - Thursday

TMI e-Newsletters FAQ
Login to see detailed Newsletter

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
August 20, 2020

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

GST Income Tax Customs Insolvency & Bankruptcy PMLA Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Indian Laws



Highlights / Catch Notes

  • GST:

    Raid - validity of search and seizure proceedings - attachment of Bank Accounts - the said principle does not apply insofar as an attachment made to protect the interest of the revenue. If notice is issued before attachment, then the account holder could as well defeat the purpose, by withdrawing the amounts kept in such accounts. - The rule for a hearing does not arise prior to attachment. Whether it arises before seeking disbursement of the amounts remaining in the account, we are not called upon to adjudicate as of now. - HC

  • GST:

    Raid - validity of search and seizure proceedings - Section 67 of the CGST Act - simultaneous proceedings of investigation when audit in progress - there are no infirmity in the audit and investigation proceeding being continued simultaneously. - HC

  • GST:

    Classification of goods - masks and sanitizers - classified as ‘Essential Commodity’ under the Essential Commodity Act, 1955 or not - seeking reduction of rate of GST from 18% to either 5% or 12% - Merely, because this petitioner feels that the GST rate applied on masks and sanitizers is excessive, this cannot be a reason for issuing a writ of mandamus and direct the respondents to reduce tax on the said commodities. - HC

  • Income Tax:

    Belated filing of ITR - offences u/s 276(c)(c) - Admittedly, the respondent on the inspection dated 18.12.2012, had seized the relevant book of accounts and as such the petitioner could not able to file the return of income on or before 05.08.2013. Therefore, the petitioner had no wilful intention to evade tax as alleged by the respondent - Further since tax has been paid in 2018, the offence is not at all attracted as against the petitioner herein, and the entire criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner is nothing but clear abuse of process of law. - HC

  • Income Tax:

    TDS u/s 192 or 195 - salary paid to expatriates - assessee has deducted tax at source u/s 192 of the Act. On the given facts of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the provisions of Section 195 of the Act do not apply. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Draft assessment order u/s 144C in the name of a non-existent company - amalgamation of the company under the scheme of merger - the draft order framed u/s 144C(1) of the Act is in the name of a non-existent company and accordingly, void ab initio, making all subsequent proceedings non- est. First substantive grievance is, accordingly, allowed. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Revision u/s 263 - Addition u/s 68 - second revisional jurisdiction of Pr. CIT - Whether the AO (called second AO) has not conducted enquiry while framing re-assessment order - if the Second Pr. CIT had to find the order of Second AO erroneous for lack of enquiry or for not collecting the entire facts, then the Second Pr. CIT ought to have called for the additional facts which he thinks that the Second AO has not collected from the assessee or the shareholders and then explained in his impugned order as to what effect those additional documents would have made on the second assessment order/reassessment order or in other words the impact on the decision making process of framing the second assessment order due to the failure of second AO’s omission to collect the additional documents. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Addition u/s 68 - Unexplained cash credit - it is to be construed that no amount in real sense has been found to be credited in the accounts of the assessee for the current assessment year and if that be so, then how an inquiry for the purpose of section 68 can be made. Therefore, there is no need to examine this evidence i.e. confirmation, capacity and genuineness of 28 applicants. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Fee u/s 234E - CIT(A) deleted the fee - where the TDS statement has been processed by the CPC and while processing the same, fee u/s 234E has been levied having tax effect less than the prescribed limit, it will continue to be governed by low tax effect circular issued by the CBDT which is binding on the Revenue. - AT

  • Customs:

    Import of Foreign Flag Vessel - Appellants have not been able to provide any definitive proof to show that during the period in dispute the vessel did proceed to a place beyond Indian territorial waters for any purpose. Therefore, the appellants cannot take recourse to the definition contained in Section 2(21) (ii) of Customs Act, 1962, to claim that the impugned vessel is a foreign going vessel - AT

  • Indian Laws:

    Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - rebuttal of presumption - The defence taken by the accused that the loan transaction was with the father of the complainant but not with the complainant since has remained not proved, the Courts below have rightly held that the complainant has proved the alleged guilt against the accused which is punishable under S.138 of the N.I. Act. - HC

  • IBC:

    Hearing of petition before NCLAT - matter listed for hearing on virtual mode - grievance is that it should not be partly physical and partly through virtual hearing - Any assertion on oath made in any petition cannot dislodge what is recorded in the order of the Court or Tribunal. Even if it has happened, there is no contemporaneous record to suggest the same. - petition rejected with cost of ₹ 10,000/-. - HC

  • IBC:

    Initiation of CIRP - Settlement of disputes between the parties - where interests of the majority of stakeholders are in serious jeopardy, it would be inappropriate to allow settlement with only two creditors which may amount to perpetrating of injustice. Exercise of inherent powers in such cases would be a travesty of justice. - AT

  • IBC:

    Maintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Period of limitation after default - the Adjudicating Authority relied on the balance sheet to hold that there was acknowledgement and thus, the claim was within limitation. - even if we are to consider that contents in Balance Sheet could be read as acknowledgment even then if we read the contents in balance sheet in the matter, the Corporate Debtor acknowledged as such the liability to pay the alleged outstanding debt. - AT


Articles


Notifications


News


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2020 (8) TMI 418
  • 2020 (8) TMI 417
  • 2020 (8) TMI 416
  • 2020 (8) TMI 415
  • 2020 (8) TMI 376
  • 2020 (8) TMI 414
  • 2020 (8) TMI 413
  • Income Tax

  • 2020 (8) TMI 410
  • 2020 (8) TMI 409
  • 2020 (8) TMI 408
  • 2020 (8) TMI 407
  • 2020 (8) TMI 406
  • 2020 (8) TMI 405
  • 2020 (8) TMI 412
  • 2020 (8) TMI 404
  • 2020 (8) TMI 403
  • 2020 (8) TMI 402
  • 2020 (8) TMI 411
  • Customs

  • 2020 (8) TMI 401
  • 2020 (8) TMI 400
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy

  • 2020 (8) TMI 397
  • 2020 (8) TMI 399
  • 2020 (8) TMI 396
  • 2020 (8) TMI 395
  • 2020 (8) TMI 394
  • 2020 (8) TMI 393
  • 2020 (8) TMI 392
  • 2020 (8) TMI 391
  • 2020 (8) TMI 390
  • 2020 (8) TMI 389
  • 2020 (8) TMI 398
  • 2020 (8) TMI 388
  • 2020 (8) TMI 373
  • 2020 (8) TMI 387
  • 2020 (8) TMI 386
  • 2020 (8) TMI 385
  • 2020 (8) TMI 384
  • 2020 (8) TMI 383
  • 2020 (8) TMI 382
  • 2020 (8) TMI 381
  • PMLA

  • 2020 (8) TMI 380
  • Central Excise

  • 2020 (8) TMI 379
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax

  • 2020 (8) TMI 377
  • 2020 (8) TMI 378
  • Indian Laws

  • 2020 (8) TMI 375
  • 2020 (8) TMI 374
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates