Search Results for "Sales Tax Demand"

675 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 675 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Tax Classification Appeal -- 'Appellants Product' Held as Fruit Drink Under UPVAT Act -- Appellants Succeeds Against Commercial Tax Commissioner

The Supreme Court allowed appeals filed by Appellants challenging the classification of their product under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 200...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Quashing Reassessment Notice in Income Tax Case Due to Change of Opinion. Reopening Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 Held Invalid When Based on Same Material Considered in Original Assessment.

The petitioner, Shivam Ispat Private Limited, filed its income tax return for Assessment Year 2016-2017 declaring total income of Rs.32,58,510/-. The ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

KAHC010028192013_1

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Hears Petition Against Coercive Recovery of Service Tax Without Adjudication, Examining Scope of Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994. The Court Considers Whether Revenue Can Take Steps Under Section 87 Absent Determination of Tax Liability Through Statutory Adjudication Process.

The petitioner, ICICI Bank Ltd., a scheduled bank, challenged a communication dated 25/3/2015 issued by the Service Tax authorities demanding interest...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore Hears Appeals by Telecom Companies Against Income Tax Department on TDS Liability. Multiple Appeals Filed Under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 Challenging ITAT Orders for Assessment Years 2005-06 to 2008-09.

The High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore heard a batch of Income Tax Appeals filed by telecom companies under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 196...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Time Limit for Availing Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. The court held that the time limit is mandatory and not directory, and retrospective amendments are valid.

The Bombay High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, addressed the constitutional validity and interpretation of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods an...