Madras High Court held that provisions of section 174(2) of the CGST Act states that repeal as per subsection (1) shall not affect any rights, privileges or obligations or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under the old Act.
ITAT Bangalore held that donation to veda pathashalas, veda pundits, medical assistance etc demonstrates the charitable activities carried on by the Trust. Accordingly, registration u/s 12A as charitable trust and approval u/s 80G granted.
ITAT Mumbai held that initiated revision jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act on mere conjectures, suspicions and surmises, is not permissible in law.
Tribunal has taken view that redemption fine of 10% and penalty of 5% of value of imported goods, would be appropriate in case of imports violating Exim Policy Provisions.
Rajendra Bana Vs ITO (Rajasthan High Court) Shri Vedant Agarwal, learned counsel representing the petitioner drew the Court’s attention to the order dated 11.10.2022 passed by Division Bench of this Court at Jaipur in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14794/2022 and urged that the impugned notice whereby, the re-assessment proceedings have been opened against the petitioner, […]
Buldelkhand Engineers Vs Commissioner Commmercial Taxes U.P. Lucknow (Allahabad High Court) It is not in dispute that a written agreement was executed between the assessee – revisionist and Auraiya Gas Power Project. Clause 2.4 categorically provided that the cost included the material and the labour for laying pipeline, the work was to be executed by […]
Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence (HQRS.) Vs M/s. Spraytec India Ltd. (Delhi High Court) The proviso to Sub-Section (2) of 28-I of the Customs Act prescribes the CAAR from allowing any application filed for advance ruling, where question raised in the application is pending in the applicant’s case before “any officer of customs, the Appellate Tribunal or […]
Once duty is paid on finished goods even though said finished goods attract nil rate of duty or exempted under any notification, cenvat credit on input cannot be denied
Jansons Textile Processors Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST Salem (CESTAT Chennai) The facts of the matter are that appellants are manufacturers of cotton textile fabrics and made ups. They were clearing some of the final products on payment of duty as per Notification No.29/2004-CE and claimed exemption under notification No.30/2004-CE on other products. […]
Madras High Court without expressing any opinion on merit, in the case of detention of Supari imported from Thailand, Court directed submission of an application under section 110-A of the Customs Act, 1962 for provisional release of goods.
