Divergent opinion on constitutional validity of Section 13(8)(b) IGST Act pertaining to intermediary services The Hon’ble Bombay HC in Dharmendra M. Jani v. Union of India [W.P. No. 2031 of 2018 dated June 09, 2021] Justice Ujjal Bhuyan held that Section 13(8)(b) of the Integrated Goods and Service Act, 2017 (“IGST Act”) is ultra vires […]
CESTAT set aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowing the refund claims of the assessee on the ground that credit reversal in Form GSTR-3B pertains to GST credit and not CENVAT credit. Held that, procedural delay will not disentitle the assessee from claiming refund when credit had been reversed in Form GSTR-3B.
The AAR, Kerala, in Abbott Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. [Advance Ruling No. KER/97/2021 decided on June 07, 2021] held that the placement of specified medical instruments to unrelated customers like hospitals, labs etc., for their use without transfer of ownership and consideration, against an agreement containing minimum purchase obligation to purchase medical instruments for specified period, […]
Usage of word ‘may’ under Section 144B(7)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) could not absolve the Revenue (the Respondent) from the obligation cast upon it to consider the request made for grant of personal hearing. Therefore, the assessment order passed by the Respondent without giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the assessee shall be set aside.
SC allowed service of notices/summons/ document via WhatsApp, Telegram in addition to e-mail The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation [Suo Moto W.P. (C) No. 3/2020 dated on July 10, 2020] w.r.t. I.A. No. 48461/2020 observed that service of notices, summons and exchange of pleadings/documents, is a requirement of virtually every […]
nothing has been shown to the Court by the Revenue Department which would connect the provisions of Section 8 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) with Section 16 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (IGST Act). Further, held that the matter requires further examination and listed the matter on August 25, 2021.
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in Raj Metal Industries & Anr. v. UOI & Ors. [W. P. A. 1629 of 2021, dated March 24, 2021] stayed the summons issued and proceedings initiated thereunder against assessee by the State GST Authorities since the proceedings were already pending on same subject matter under Central Goods and Services […]
Madras High Court held that provision of food and drink to be taken-away in parcels by restaurant tantamount to the sale of food and drink and thus, shall not attract service tax under the Finance Act.
AAR held that, GST is applicable on payment of notice pay by an employee to employer in lieu of notice period and telephone charges, Group Medical Insurance Policy (Policy) recovered from employees and free of cost canteen facility provided to employees. Further, Input Tax Credit (ITC) is not available with respect to canteen services provided by the employer to their employees.
Nothing in the CCR prohibits an assessee from following Rule 6(2) of the CCR in respect of the inputs and input services where it is feasible to maintain separate records and follow Rule 6(3A) of the CCR in case of such inputs or input services where it is not feasible to do so.
