Four Imp Verdicts

PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (Supreme Court)

S. 170/ 292BB: A notice issued in the name of the amalgamating entity after amalgamation is void because the amalgamating entity ceases to exist. Participation in the proceedings by the assessee cannot operate as an estoppel against law. This is a substantive illegality and not a procedural violation of the nature adverted to in s. 292B. There is a value which the court must abide by in promoting the interest of certainty in tax litigation. Not doing so will only result in uncertainty and displacement of settled expectations. There is a significant value which must attach to observing the requirement of consistency and certainty. Individual affairs are conducted and business decisions are made in the expectation of consistency, uniformity and certainty. To detract from those principles is neither expedient nor desirable

PIB on last date to claim ITC to be the due date of GSTR-3B held illegal by the HC

We wish to update you in respect of the recent ruling by the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat, which relates to legality and validity of Para 3 of the Press Release dated 18 October 2018, which clarified that the last date to avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) in relation to invoices issued during the period July 2017 to March 2018.   

Proposed TDS provisions in Budget 2019

1. Individuals and HUFs (not liable for tax audit) shall deduct tax from sum payable to resident contractor or professionals

[Applicable from September 1, 2019]

As per current provisions of Section 194C and Section 194J, an individual or HUF, who are not liable to tax audit under Section 44AB, shall not be required to deduct tax under these provisions. Thus, no tax is required to be deducted by an individual or HUF from payment made to contractor or professional in the following cases:

Decoding Budget 2019

Are Proposed Amendments in Finance (No. 2) Bill 2019 identify with a Satiated Elephant satisfied with few mounds of rice or an Insatiate Elephant trampling fields?