Rajasthan High Court
Rajasthan High Court Partly Quashes CBIC Circular Restricting ITC Refund For Inverted Duty Structure Up To 18.07.2022
The Rajasthan High Court has quashed Point No. 2 of the Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST dated 10.11.2022, restricting ITC claims on the inverted duty structure prior to 18.07.2022. The bench, consisting of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Sangeeta Sharma, stated that if the impugned clarification is tested on the anvil of reasonableness, it falls foul to Article 14 of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as the right to claim refund of Input Tax Credit of the input tax on inverted duty structure ...
Rajasthan GST Act | HC Calls For 'Purposive' Interpretation Of S.107, Asks Why Assessment Orders Cannot Be Sent On Assessee's Email
The Rajasthan High Court has questioned why the tax department can send attachment orders via email, but not assessment orders, to ward off any communication gap or confusion about the date of communication.The Court was hearing a petition filed against the order of the Appellate Authority, State Tax, that had rejected an appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 107(1) of the Rajasthan GST Act, 2017.The division bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta and Justice Sangeeta...
IGST Act | Party Providing Services Under Bipartite Agreement Cannot Be Labelled As “Intermediary”: Rajasthan High Court
While hearing a petition against the decision of Department of Revenue by a company providing services to a foreign entity, Rajasthan High Court held that for someone to be called an “intermediary”, there had be existence of 3 parties in the contract, in the absence of which, the services rendered under a bipartite agreement could not be called “intermediary”.The division bench of Justice Mr. K.R. Shriram and Justice Maneesh Sharma was hearing the petition filed by a subsidiary of IDP Australia,...
Filing Application U/S 10 Of Commercial Courts Act With S.34 Petition Fulfills Requirements U/S 34 Of A&C Act: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court Bench of Justices Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Chandra Prakash Shrimali has held that merely if an application filed under Section 10, Commercial Courts Act (“CCA”) does not mention Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act (“ACA”) in the heading, it does not mean that the application cannot be treated as an application under Section 34, ACA. Filing the application under Section 10, CCA and annexing the Section 34 petition fulfils the requirement of Section 34...
Rajasthan High Court Quashes Challenge Against State Amendment Imposing New Motor Vehicle Tax On “Sleeper Bus”
The Rajasthan High Court rejected the challenge made to an amendment brought in by the Transport Department by which a new category of “sleeper bus” was added for levying motor vehicle tax, taking it out from the previous category without qualifying it for the exemptions available under other categories.The division bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Anuroop Singhi held that the “bus” fell in the definitions under Sections 2(7) and 2(29) of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Act,...
Arbitration Act | Notice U/S 21 Not Always Necessary If Other Party Was Aware Of Dispute: Rajasthan High Court
Rajasthan High Court ruled that since the respondent was already aware of and was not taken by surprise regarding petitioner's invocation of arbitration clause, their plea that the application for appointment of arbitrator was not maintainable since no notice was served under Section 21 of the A&C Act 1996, lacked merit.The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand also reiterated the principle laid down in the case of M.D. Frozen Foods Exports Private Limited & others v. Hero Fincorp Limited...
Arbitrator Can't Grant Relief Contrary To Terms Of Contract: Rajasthan High Court Sets Aside Award Of Compensation For Delay
The Rajasthan High Court bench comprising Justice Avneesh Jhingan and Justice Bhuwan Goyal have held that an arbitral award which grants reliefs beyond the express terms of the contract, including compensation for losses and interest where no such entitlement exists under the agreement, is patently illegal and liable to be set aside under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Brief Facts On 08.08.2003, the State of Rajasthan issued a tender for the construction...
Limitation U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Begins From Date Of Receipt Of Award When Delivery Is Undisputed: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justices Avneesh Jhingan and Bhuwan Goyal has held that when the delivery of the arbitral award at the registered address is not disputed, the limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act cannot be suspended on the ground that the appellant became aware of the award at a later date. The limitation period must be computed from the date of receipt of the award, not from the date of knowledge. Brief Facts: The present appeal...
Arbitral Award Can't Be Set Aside Over Insufficient Stamping Without Opportunity To Cure Defect: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justices Avneesh Jhingan and Bhuwan Goyal has held that when a court, in proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) finds that the agreement to sell, on which the arbitration was initiated, is insufficiently stamped, it must provide the party an opportunity to cure the defect by impounding the instrument. The court cannot set aside the arbitral award on the ground that the agreement was invalid due to...
Refund Of Liquidated Damages Imposed By Party Responsible For Delay In Work Can't Be Interfered With U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justices Avneesh Jhingan and Bhuwan Goyal has held that the imposition of liquidated damages by a party primarily responsible for the delay in completion of the work is unjustified. Therefore, the arbitrator's direction to refund such damages cannot be interfered with, given the limited scope of appellate intervention under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act). Brief Facts: Rajasthan Urban Infrastructures...
Income Tax Act | Rajasthan HC Dismisses Challenge Against Proceedings Initiated U/S 153C Based On WhatsApp Chats, Says Chats Had Been Corroborated
Rajasthan High Court denied interference with initiation of proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) that were alleged to be initiated merely based on certain WhatsApp Chats, observing that the information in the chats were completely corroborated by specific transactions and hence, the said chat could be considered to be falling under the definition of “other documents” under Section 153C.The division bench of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Chandra...
Rajasthan HC Quashes Prosecution Sanction Against E-Commerce Company For Delay In Depositing TDS Due To Late Submission Of Bills By Amazon, E-Bay
Rajasthan High Court set aside prosecution under Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), against the petitioner-company whose business activity related to e-commerce transactions, and owing to delay on part of the companies like Amazon, Naaptol, Ebay, etc. in submitting the bills, the petitioner got delayed by almost 10 months in submitting the deducted TDS.The division bench of Justice Maneesh Sharma and Justice Avneesh Jhingan held that since the TDS was deposited voluntarily by the petitioner, that...