CESTAT held that the value of scrap arising during the process of manufacture by the job worker is not included in the value of the goods cleared by the job worker to the principal manufacturer for the purpose of levying excise duty.
Service Tax on the amount of liquidated damages – CESTAT Held that, Service Tax is not payable on liquidated damages collected in the nature of penalty.
No interest and penalty to be imposed if credit is merely availed but not utilised | Section 73 & 74 Interest will be attracted only if wrong/excess ITC availed & utilized
In re MEK Peripherals India Pvt Ltd. (GST AAR Maharashtra) Incentives received for market services within India cannot be considered as trade discount nor export service The AAR, Maharashtra in the matter of M/s. MEK Peripherals India Pvt. Ltd., [Advance Ruling No. GST-ARA-59/2020-21/B-56 dated April 27, 2022] has held that incentives received by the Indian […]
HC Held that, the Revenue Department could not have intercepted or detained the vehicle in the absence of a second e-way bill as the first e-way bill was valid during the interception period.
Advance ruling is not binding on the supplier, and the supplier may not follow the ruling and In such a scenario, the advance ruling loses its relevance and applicability.
In re Coronation Arts Crafts (GST AAR Tamilnadu) 18% GST applicable on the supply of Printed Leaflet on own paper and materials The AAR, Tamil Nadu in the matter of M/s. the Coronation Arts Crafts [Order No.19/ARA/2022 dated May 31, 2022] has held that the supply of printed leaflets on paper and materials of the […]
Rajasthan High Court imposes fine of INR 50K on Revenue Authority for illegal tax recovery. Learn about the case and its implications.
HC stayed the order of cancellation of GST Registration and directed the Revenue Department to open the GST site so as to enable the assessee to continue their trading activities in relation to the stocks held by them at the time of passing of order for cancellation of GST Registration, for a period of two weeks.
HC held that the Managing Director of a company should not be directly summoned by authorities under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 . Further held that, authorized representatives of a company are to be summoned and MD can only be summoned, if the former is not cooperating or if investigation is to be completed expeditiously.
