Scrutiny Notice Was Issued In Amalgamating Company's Name Despite Dept Knowing Of Amalgamation: Calcutta HC Declines To Apply S.292B Of Income Tax Act

The Calcutta High Court has refused to apply Section 292B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to a scrutiny notice issued in an amalgamating company's name, despite the Assessing Officer being aware about the company's amalgamation. Section 292-B provides that no notice or assessment or any proceedings can be deemed to be invalid merely for the reason of any mistake, defect or omission in such notice, assessment or other proceedings. In the case at hand, a division bench of Chief Justice ...

Factual Examination Of Dispute Regarding 'Addition' Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 Of IT Act Is Beyond Scope Of Appeal U/S 260A: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court has held that it cannot indulge in factual examination of the material produced or not produced by an assessee-company to explain the share capital and premium received by it, in an appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. A division bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya thus refused to interfere with an ITAT order which deleted additions made by the Assessing Officer towards “unexplained” share capital and share...

Transfer Of License Is “Deemed Sale,” Consideration Received Cannot Be Subjected To Service Tax: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the transfer of a license constitutes a “deemed sale” under article 366(29A)(d) of the Constitution and, therefore, any consideration received from it cannot be subjected to service tax. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that “…..The consideration received by the assessee on the execution of the License Agreement cannot,...

Premature Withdrawal Of Investment From 'Capital Gain Tax Exemption Bonds' Defeats Legislative Intent Behind S. 54EC Of Income Tax Act: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that an investor of 'Capital Gain Tax Exemption Bonds' cannot seek premature withdrawal through judicial intervention. A single bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula ruled that such an act would defeat the legislative intent behind Section 54EC of Income Tax Act, 1961. The provision stipulates that long-term capital gain will not be charged on an assessee if he invests in certain specified bonds (which come with a lock-in period). In the case at...

CGST Act | Commissioner Empowered To Withhold Refunds Both From Electronic Cash Ledger And Electronic Credit Ledger: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that refunds, be it from the balance left in Electronic Cash or the Electronic Credit Ledger, are treated at par and the Commissioner under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act may withhold both in exercise of its powers under Section 108. Section 108 empowers the revisional authority to place in abeyance “any order” made under the CGST Act, which in its opinion could be said to be illegal, improper or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. In the...

[Confiscation] No Provision For Waiver Of Show Cause Notice U/S 124 Of Customs Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently came to the rescue of an OCI cardholder whose luxury watch was confiscated by the Customs Department when she landed at IGI Airport, without issuance of any show cause notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. Section 124 stipulates that no order confiscating any goods shall be made unless the owner of the goods is given a notice informing him the grounds of confiscation, an opportunity of making a representation against confiscation and a...

Assessee Is Not Responsible For Disclosing Individual Transactions In ST-3 Returns: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that ST-3 Return does not require transaction wise details. There is neither any responsibility on the assessee nor any scope to disclose individual transactions in the ST-3 returns. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that “it is the responsibility of the Central Excise Officer with whom the Returns are filed to scrutinise them and...

'Capital Grant Subsidy' Paid To Contractor To Meet Economic Shortfall In Revenue Is Not Liable For TDS Deduction: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that 'capital grant subsidy' which may be extended by the National Highways Authority of India to its contractors is not liable to TDS deduction under Section 194C of the Income Tax Act, since such grant cannot be construed as payment for a “work”.Section 194C requires deduction of tax at source on any sum which may be paid to a contractor for carrying out any work.Capital grant subsidy is financial support which is rendered by NHAI to its Concessionaires in...

Refund Rejection Order Passed Without Hearing Opportunity Violates Rule 92(3) Of CGST Rules, Principles Of Natural Justice: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court stated that refund rejection order passed without hearing opportunity violates rule 92(3) of CGST Rules, 2017 and principles of natural justice. The Bench of Justices M. S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain observed that “……in any event, proviso to Rule 92(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, contemplates reasonable opportunity to be heard, implying that such hearing should be after the assessee files the reply within the time prescribed in the show cause notice.” Rule 92(3) of...

Once Service Fee Is Refunded By Assessee, Transaction Between Parties No Longer Qualifies As Service & No Service Tax Is Leviable: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that once the consideration (service fee) is refunded by the Assessee to the service recipient, the transaction between the two parties no longer qualified as a 'service' and no service tax would be leviable thereupon. The Bench of Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that “…the waiver of service fee must be understood as the...

Initiation Of Prosecution U/S 51 Of Black Money Act Not Dependent On Completion Of Assessment Proceedings U/S 10 For Tax Evasion: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that initiation of prosecution under Section 51 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets and Imposition of Tax) Act, 2015 is not dependent on completion of assessment proceedings initiated against an accused under Section 10 to determine tax evasion. The Black Money Act, 2015 is designed to address "undisclosed assets located outside India" that are held by an assessee either as the owner or as the beneficial owner. Section 51 penalizes...

Certified Copy Not Necessary To File GST Appeal, Order Downloaded From Site Enough: Gujarat High Court

Quashing an order of the tax authority which rejected a GST Appeal due to non-submission of a certified copy, the Gujarat High Court said that when an appealed order is available on a common portal and can be directly accessed by the Appellate Authority, there should be no need to submit a “certified copy” to confirm its authenticity.The court further underscored that in today's age insistence on certified copy of orders which can be obtained directly from the website of judicial and...