Nai Dunia Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax and Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Appellant urges that there is no dispute about the fact that the appellant have shared the electricity received from MPEB with Web Dunia, PPPL and others on proportionate (reimbursement) basis. Admittedly, the appellant has not generated electricity. […]
Aurolab Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) The issue is whether the refund claim is hit by the bar of unjust enrichment. Undisputedly, the appellant has mentioned the duty element in the invoices issued to the buyers. The presumption envisaged in section 12B of Central Excise Act, 1944 then applies and the […]
Sh. Jasdeep Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has furnished all the vouchers. He submitted that the Assessing Officer remarked that vouchers of Rs.5,31,271/- of Taj Mahal Hotel were not furnished is totally wrong as the same was duly furnished and there is no specific defect pointed […]
DRAFT – International Financial Services Centres Authority (Maintenance of Insurance Records and Submission of Requisite Information for Investigation and Inspection) Regulations, 2022
Syed Adeel Shah Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Jammu and Kashmir High Court) It appears that in an earlier round of litigation wherein the appellants had challenged the notice issued by the respondents under Section 8(4) of the PMLA Act, learned writ court had declined to grant indulgence in favour of the appellants and the writ […]
Section 203(5) of Companies Act, 2013 imposes penalties for non-compliance with provision regarding appointment of a Whole-time Company Secretary
It is alleged that rather than exporting gold jewellery in terms of the obligation, the jewellery was diverted in the domestic market and in the process the offences were committed by the appellant.
In the present case the payment of anti dumping duty is not due to assessment or reassessment of Bills of entry but merely by a letter from the department, therefore there is nothing in the bills of entry to challenge.
Gujarat Metal Cast Industries Ltd. Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT held that if the sale of goods is on FOR, freight is included in assessable value on which excise duty was paid and the freight was not separately charged to the customer of the goods, the assessee is entitled for the Cenvat Credit. […]
ITAT held that Rule 128(9) of the Rules does not provide for disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) in case of delay in filing Form No. 67; (ii) filing of Form No. 67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement and (iii) DTAA overrides the provisions of the Act and the Rules cannot be contrary to the Act.
