SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Sh. G.S. Grewal, CA & Ms Harsimran Grewal, CA For the Respondent : Ms. Princy Singla, Sr. DR ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 28.11.2017 of CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. 'FAA') appeal no. 10432/16-17 arising out of an appeal before it against the order dated... ... ...

कार्यालय, राज्य कर आयुक्त, छत्तीसगढ़ नार्थ ब्लॉक, सेक्टर-19, वाणिज्यिक कर-जीएसटी भवन, नव&... ... ...

Mumbai, Sep 1 (PTI) The rupee gained 28 paise to close at nearly two-month high of 94.94 (provisional) against the US dollar on Tuesday on robust domestic growth, controlled fiscal slippage and portfolio-related inflows. Forex traders said recent MSCI-linked inflows are offering temporary support to the rupee. Moreover, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) might have intervened to support the domestic currency, they said. At the interbank foreign exchange market, the rupee opened at 95.06... ... ...

SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri T. S. Khalsa (Sr. DR) For the Respondent : None ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT; 1. This appeal by revenue is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [for short 'the ld. CIT(A)] in Appeal No. CIT(A)-53/IT-299/DCCC-5(2)/2016-17 order dated 16.07.2018. Assessment was framed by DCIT CC-5(2), Mumbai under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act,... ... ...

GST treatment of restaurant services supplied through e-commerce operators is aligned under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 with the corresponding Central Government clarification. The Commissioner of State Tax, exercising powers under section 168(1), applies Circular No. 167/23/2021-GST with necessary modifications to secure uniform application of GST provisions to these supplies within Chhattisgarh.

Clarifications on applicable GST rates and exemptions for certain services are made applicable under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The measure adopts relevant Government of India clarifications and applies them, with necessary modifications, as though issued under the State GST law, to ensure uniformity in the application of GST provisions.

GST rate and goods-classification clarifications are adopted for application in Chhattisgarh to secure uniformity in State GST administration. Exercising the instruction-making power under section 168(1) of the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the Commissioner of State Tax directs that the related provisions operate for State GST purposes with necessary modifications, as if issued under that Act.

Fresh enquiry and verification directed in revision proceedings must be completed before an addition for alleged unexplained share capital and premium is sustained. Required steps included issuing summons to secure the concerned directors' presence, but the assessment record did not establish when notice was issued and recorded that the enquiry could not be undertaken. Making a substantial addition through a summary assessment without completing those enquiries requires fresh adjudication on merits after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of hearing. The alleged unexplained share capital remains open for determination in accordance with law.

The State Tax Commissioner adopts central GST Policy Wing provisions concerning the applicability of GST Act provisions to certain GST-related issues. Those provisions are to operate for Chhattisgarh GST purposes with such modifications as are necessary and are to be treated as issued under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. They form the State-level basis for consistent application of GST Act provisions to the identified issues.

Rule 6(4A) permits excess service tax paid in an earlier period to be adjusted against service-tax liability for a succeeding month or quarter, without requiring adjustment in the immediately following period. Its plain language does not compel a taxpayer to seek a refund merely because no immediate liability exists or because the excess exceeds that liability. Requiring refund in those circumstances would retain tax already paid without legal authority. Adjustment of the excess against a later March 2009 liability was therefore valid, and the related demand, interest and penalty were unsustainable.

Common interest expenditure must be allocated between eligible housing-finance business and ineligible business when computing the deduction under section 36(1)(viii). Where the segmental allocation method and eligible-business profit computation were accepted in preceding assessment years, and no material facts or legal position have changed, that established method remains applicable. The Commissioner (Appeals)' allocation and consequential deduction computation were therefore sustained in favour of the assessee.

A stay of operation leaves a coordinate-bench ruling in existence but makes it inoperative while the stay continues. Accordingly, a direction to constitute an arbitral tribunal could not be followed where the ruling containing that direction had been stayed. The question whether arbitration could proceed against an expelled defaulting trading member remained pending before the Supreme Court, so determination of the petition was deferred and the issue was left to be governed by the Supreme Court's decision.

Section 24(5) of the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 enables the Registrar to protect a breeder's interests against abusive third-party conduct from filing of a registration application until the Authority decides it. Exercise of that power is not contingent on completed registration. A Supreme Court stay of a declaration that Section 24(5) is unconstitutional suspends the declaration's operative effect, leaving the provision enforceable during the stay. Withdrawal of only injunctive and ex parte prayers does not, where rights are reserved through modified prayers, relinquish claims for damages and costs.

Money-laundering investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act concerns alleged irregularities in Public Service Commission recruitment examinations. Allegations include question-paper leaks, manipulation of candidate selection, and illegal gratification for securing appointments of relatives and favoured candidates. Recruitment rules were allegedly amended to facilitate selection of relatives. Alleged proceeds of crime were collected in cash and routed through layered banking transactions, including through a family-controlled samiti presented as receiving corporate social responsibility donations for a non-existent college.

AEO-T1 certification operates through continuous certification/auto-renewal rather than periodic renewal applications, subject to annual self-declarations and compliance monitoring. Declarations are filed through the AEO online portal during the prescribed annual filing period, with an exemption for entities certified during that calendar year. A Comprehensive Compliance Review is based on at least two annual declarations and must be completed before the third declaration becomes due. Adverse compliance information may trigger action, and revocation of continuous certification requires a fresh application for new AEO-T1 certification.

The scope of intermediary under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is clarified to resolve doubts and ensure uniform GST application. Guidance contained in Circular No. 159/15/2021-GST applies with necessary modifications under the State Act and operates as though issued under that Act for matters concerning intermediary services.

Extension of the time limit for applying for revocation of cancellation of GST registration is clarified under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax framework in line with the corresponding Central Tax and State Tax notifications. For uniform implementation, the clarification governing this extension is applied with necessary modifications under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

A five-member special bench found that no clear majority view existed under section 419(5) of the Companies Act and stayed the third member's order that had permitted the proposed recovery. Notices were directed to all parties, and the guarantor was restrained from directly or indirectly alienating property pending further consideration. The dispute concerns approval of a personal guarantor's repayment proposal, treatment of guarantee claims, creditor voting support, assessment of the personal estate, and scrutiny of declared net worth.

Extension of limitation periods under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is governed, with necessary modifications, by the provisions issued on 20 July 2021 concerning the Supreme Court's order dated 27 April 2021. Exercising powers under section 168(1), the Commissioner of State Tax makes those provisions applicable under the Chhattisgarh GST Act to secure uniform application of the extended GST limitation framework.

A five-member special National Company Law Tribunal bench hearing Subhash Chandra's personal insolvency matter issued notices to all parties and restrained him from alienating property directly or indirectly. The restraint applies during the continuing insolvency proceedings and concerns dealings with the relevant property. The procedural measure requires the interested parties to participate in the matter.