The Tribunal held that a residential unit does not lose its residential nature merely because it is located within a building housing a nursing home. Proportionate exemption under Section 54F was therefore allowed.
Tribunal held that reassessment beyond three years was not permissible where alleged escaped income was only ₹38 lakh. Since statutory threshold of ₹50 lakh was not met, reassessment was quashed.
CESTAT Bangalore held that Air Velocity 2700 was correctly classified under CTH 8517 6260 after examining its functional characteristics. The Tribunal found that its role in receiving, synchronizing, and routing signals supported the importer’s classification.
Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Vs Abhishek Mundhra (CESTAT Kolkata) The Revenue challenged an Order-in-Appeal that had set aside the confiscation of 15 kg of gold bangles/strips and 1,754.29 grams of silver granules, as well as penalties imposed on various noticees. The case originated from a DRI operation based on intelligence alleging that gold smuggled from […]
The Delhi High Court observed that rejection of a GST refund claim after repeated judicial directions to grant the refund may amount to contempt. The Court granted time to the department to file its response before further consideration.
The Kerala High Court held that the non obstante clause in Section 16(5) prevails over the time limit prescribed under Section 16(4) for claiming ITC. The Court quashed the denial order and directed reconsideration of the taxpayer’s claim.
The Court set aside the refund rejection after finding that the appellate authority failed to record specific findings or provide adequate reasons. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
The Madras High Court held that a general penalty under Section 125 of the TNGST Act cannot be imposed when a specific late fee has already been levied. The Court partly allowed the writ petition and directed payment of the applicable late fee.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court declined to entertain challenges to GST adjudication orders because a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act was available. The Court held that disputed findings on service tax liability should be examined by the appellate authority.
The High Court condoned a 720-day delay in filing a GST appeal after finding that severe financial difficulties and circumstances beyond the taxpayer’s control caused the delay. The appeal was directed to be heard on merits.
