SC upheld Section 147 reassessment, holding a Section 143(1) intimation is not an assessment and reopening requires a bona fide reason to believe.
The Supreme Court held excise duty paid by buyers formed part of turnover, discussed colourable devices, and distinguished legitimate tax planning.
Supreme Court held a levy is a fee only when linked to a specific service or benefit. Absence of quid pro quo makes it a tax, regardless of label.
CESTAT Delhi held that overseas liaison offices functioning merely as communication channels cannot be treated as separate service providers to their Indian head office. The Tribunal set aside service tax demands on reimbursements and emphasized that one cannot provide services to oneself.
The Gujarat High Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, holding that ITC is unavailable if the supplier fails to deposit GST. The key takeaway is that bona fide purchasers remain subject to statutory ITC conditions despite having fulfilled their own obligations.
Supreme Court held that Input Tax Credit claims cannot be validated merely through invoices and cheque payments, requiring purchasers to prove genuine movement and delivery of goods.
The Tribunal held that the Indian entity was only a distributor and not a technology or content owner. It rejected the Revenue’s attempt to recharacterise the business and apply royalty-based valuation.
The article highlights that failure to serve proper notice under Rule 8 can invalidate proceedings. Adequate notice is a mandatory condition for fair hearing.
The law defines business broadly to include trade, commerce, and even single transactions. The key takeaway is that intent and nature of activity determine tax treatment.
Section 145(3) allows rejection of books if accounts are unreliable or standards are not followed. The key takeaway is that specific defects must be identified before invoking this power.
