Tax
IPC Provisions Can't Be Invoked Directly Without Applying Penal Provisions Of GST Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court stated that GST authorities cannot bypass the procedural safeguards under the GST Act by directly invoking IPC provisions without first applying the penal provisions of the GST Act. The Division Bench of Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Duppala Venkata Ramana observed that “GST Act, 2017 is a special legislation which holistically deals with procedure, penalties and offences relating GST and at the cost of repetition this court cannot emphasise...
Appeal Can't Be Rejected For Failure To Upload Documents On GST Portal Due To Technical Errors: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court stated that an appeal cannot be rejected solely due to the failure to upload documents on the GST portal if the delay or failure is due to technical errors on the portal. The Bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “….an appeal should not be rejected without affording the parties an opportunity to be heard, particularly when the rejection arises from technical issues beyond their control.” Facts of the case: The assessee/petitioner manually filed...
Interest Can Be Waived In Situations Beyond Assessee's Control In Timely Filing Of Returns: Punjab And Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that interest for late filing of income tax returns can be waived in situations where the delay was beyond the control of assessee. The Bench of Justices Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Sanjay Vashisth observed that “….while exercising the discretion by the Settlement Commission, no reasons have been assigned as to why the interest has been reduced by 50% only, and as to why the complete interest has not been waived off for the assessment year...
S. 2(h) Orissa Entry Tax Act | Tractor Trolley Not 'Motor Vehicle' & Not Amenable To Entry Tax: High Court
The Orissa High Court has held that tractor trailer/trolley is not a 'motor vehicle' as per Section 2(h) of the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999 ('OET Act') and therefore, not amenable to entry tax as per the said statute.Interpreting the meaning of 'motor vehicle' as per the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('MV Act') as well as the OET Act, the Division Bench of Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo held:“We have already seen definition given of 'motor vehicle' and 'vehicle' in section...
No Documentary Evidence From Department To Support Allegations; Supreme Court Grants Bail To Assessee Arrested Under Section 69 of CGST Act
The Supreme Court allowed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the assessee/accused, granting bail in a case registered under Section 132(1)(b), 132(1)(f), and 132(1)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal granted bail on the basis that the department failed to file any documentary evidence against the assessee/accused to substantiate the allegations made in the case, despite the court's direction. Section 69...
NCLT Order Prevails Over GST Demand, Even If State Is Not Notified About Pending NCLT Proceedings: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court stated that National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) order prevails over Goods and Services Tax (GST) demand, even if the state government is not notified about the pending NCLT proceedings. The Division Bench of Justices R. Raghunandan Rao and Harinath N. observed that “the contention of the department that the order of NCLT is not binding on the State of Andhra Pradesh in view of Section 88 of the GST Act would have to be negatived in as much as Section 238...
Treaty Provisions Prevails Over Income Tax Act – Receipts From Aircraft Leasing Is Not Taxable As Royalty: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court held that consideration received by Assessee from aircraft leasing activity is not taxable as royalty either u/s 9(1)(vi) of Income Tax Act or under India-Ireland DTAA. Under section 9(1)(vi) of the Income tax Act, royalty payable by the Indian Government to any non-resident, shall always be deemed to accrue or arise in India, without any exception. In such a case, the government could be the Central government or the State government. Pointing out that the...
'Cheeselings' By Parle-G Classified As 'Namkeen', Exempt From Excise Duty: CESTAT
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that 'Cheeselings' by Parle-G is 'namkeen' which is exempted from the excise duty under S. No. 29 of the Notification No. 3/2006-Central Excise dated 1st March 2006. The Bench of C J Mathew (Technical Member) and Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) has observed that “'Namkeen' has not been defined either contextually in the notification or as a separate nomenclature in the tariff. Therefore, the...
Second Provisional Attachment Notice Lacking Fresh Reasons Is Arbitrary: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court stated that issuing a second provisional attachment notice without providing new or fresh reasons is considered arbitrary. The Division Bench of Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Manjive Shukla observed that “the department cannot be allowed simpliciter to issue a second notice, and thereafter, third and fourth and continue with the provisional attachment for four to five years without giving any fresh reason for the said provisional attachment. If the same was...
In Absence Of Specific Reasons, GST Registration Can't Be Cancelled With Retrospective Effect : Delhi High Court
Finding that the Show Cause Notice (SCN) did not mention any particulars, which would provide any clue to the taxpayer/ petitioner as to the reasons for cancellation of its GST registration, the Delhi High Court quashed the SCN as well as the order, by which the GST Commissioner had cancelled the GST registration of petitioner with retrospective effect. The Division Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Sachin Datta observed that “The SCN did not mention any intelligible reason....
Income Tax Refund Can't Be Denied To Taxpayer For Discrepancy In Form 26AS Filed: Delhi High Court
While observing that tax was duly deducted by the Land Acquisition Collector but was not disclosed for some reasons and hence the credit was not reflected in Form 26AS, the Delhi High Court held that the assessee/ petitioner cannot be penalized for the mere reason that the Form 26AS suffered from a discrepancy. Therefore, condoning the delay u/s 119 of the Income tax Act, the High Court quashed an order, by which the Revenue Department had rejected the Assessee's application to submit...
Detention Under Customs Act – Authority Must Specify Nature Of Infraction/ Violation, For Tentative Denial Of Preferential Duty Treatment: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court held that the Proper officer under Customs Act cannot detain the goods or stall the process of importation, without forming a requisite opinion regarding any forgery in import. The High Court clarified that the proper officer does not have any unfettered power to initiate a verification process, and it is incumbent upon him to form a requisite opinion in support of a suspicion that he had regarding the issue of Country-Of-Origin (COO) certificate or the origin of...