CESTAT Delhi held that when the Duty Free Scrips are forged, the importer cannot be permitted to take plea that they were not involved in fraud or forgery. Accordingly, appeal dismissed and duty demand confirmed.
Jharkhand High Court held that Jharkhand Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (First Amendment) Rules, 2019 levying application/ inspection fee of Rs. 25,000/- or Rs. 12,500/- are declared unconstitutional and are struck down.
Patna High Court held that demand cum show cause notice without pre-show cause consultation as per Master Circular No. 1053/02/2017-CS dated 10.03.2017 justified since petitioner has failed to furnish requisite return in Form ST-3.
Calcutta High Court held that once, the self-assessed tax as per Section 37 is included in the return furnished under Section 39 of the CGST Act, Section 75(12) of the CGST Act can no longer be invoked for recovery.
The decisions also hold that if the data is not stored in the computer but officers take out a printout from the hard disk drive by connecting it to the computer, then a certificate under section 36B of the Central Excise Act is mandatory.
Patna High Court held that delay of about three years in passing of service tax order with no reason explained for the delay is not justifiable. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and order is liable to be set aside.
Madras High Court held that rejection of e-Form NDH-4 application beyond time limit of 45 days is not allowable hence petitioner directed to submit a fresh reply regarding compliance of defects stated in orders.
Supreme Court held that Schott (principal domestic manufacturer) offering volume-based discounts doesn’t constitute abuse of dominance under section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.
CESTAT Delhi held that imposition of penalty under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 not justified since revenue failed to establish direct involved of Customs Broker in mis-declaration of imported goods. Accordingly, appeal allowed and penalty deleted.
ITAT Pune held that in respect of unabated assessment, no addition can be made by AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order set aside and appeal allowed.
