Expert Knowledge,
Straight from Practitioners.
Tax tips, legal guides, and financial advice written by the same verified CAs, Advocates, and Advisors you can consult on ConsultEase.
Import / ExportAdvocating for SEZs to Sell Goods in the Domestic Market by Paying Duties on Inputs Forgone: GTRI’s Perspective
Currently, Special Economic Zones (SEZs) have the privilege of selling their products in the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) by paying duties based on the finished goods they produce. The Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) has pointed out that the government already grants the option of
GST LitigationITC cant be denied for a technical error in return (pdf Attach)
The public_profile can be reached at shaifaly.ca@gmail.com Cases Covered: M/S BODAL CHEMICALS LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA Citation: M/s. Vishnu Aroma Pouching Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Union of India Facts of the cases: “(A) That Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a Writ of
CA Shafaly GirdharwalSC decided to not to proceed with SLP due to threshold of 2 cr in Income tax matter
Considering the minimal notice provided and the relatively low tax amount in question, we are disinclined to adjudicate the current special leave petition. This stance aligns with Circular No. 17/2019, dated August 8, 2019, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue,
GST ComplianceUltraTech Cement has been issued an order for a GST demand and associated penalty totaling Rs 2.28 crore.
The company intends to pursue legal action in response to the aforementioned order, as it has already deposited the differential duty with interest, yet the authority has failed to acknowledge this. During the quarter ending on September 30, 2023, the company reported an impressive increase
GST LitigationIntention to evade tax is mandatory for penalty u/s 129 (Pdf Attach)
The public_profile can be reached at shaifaly.ca@gmail.com Cases Covered: Rumki Biswas V/s Senior Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Budge Budge Charge & anr. Facts of the cases: The case of the appellant is that they had generated part A of the e-way bill on 22nd March,
CA Shafaly GirdharwalCalcutta High Court extends bail to NDPS accused, citing the absence of a forensic report
Although the charge-sheet was submitted within the stipulated 180-day timeframe, it appeared to be a mere formality, not reflecting true adherence to the provisions of the statute. Section 37 of the NDPS Act demands strict interpretation, as it pertains to an individual’s fundamental rights and
GST LitigationNo recovery till the GST Tribunal is formed
The public_profile can be reached at shaifaly.ca@gmail.com Cases Covered: M/s Vardhman Ispat Udyog Vs State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. Citation: Rochem India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Union of India Facts of the cases: As the appellate tribunal is not formed.The petitioner is compelled to
CA Shafaly GirdharwalSection 28 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita as compared to same provision in IPC Act 1860
Section 28 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita on TEXT : A consent is not such a consent as is intended by any section of this Sanhita,–– (a) if the consent is given by a person under fear of injury, or under a misconception of fact, and
GST LitigationGST DRC01B shall be issued before recovery proceedings
The public_profile can be reached at shaifaly.ca@gmail.com Cases Covered: Caterpillar India Private Limited V/s Assistant Commissioner, Office Facts of the cases: The petitioner has now filed this writ petition challenging the recovery notice dated 13.09.2023. The challenge to the impugned recovery notice is primarily on
CA Shafaly Girdharwal[update] Registration cant be kept suspended for long time
The case is updated on 12-01-2024. The updated copy is attached here. The public_profile can be reached at shaifaly.ca@gmail.com Cases Covered: M/S TESZLA MULTI TRADE Versus UNION OF INDIA Facts of the cases: It appears that the petitioner has been issued Show Cause Notice for
CA Shafaly GirdharwalSection 30 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita as compared to same provision in IPC Act 1860
Section 30 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita on TEXT : Nothing is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause to a person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, even without that person’s consent, if the circumstances are such that
Section 27 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita as compared to same provision in IPC Act 1860
Section 27 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita on TEXT : Nothing which is done in good faith for the benefit of a person under twelve years of age, or of person with mental illness, by or by consent, either express or implied, of the guardian or