The issue was whether receipt of shares on amalgamation attracts tax when shares are held as stock-in-trade. The Court held such substitution can trigger business income under Section 28 if the shares are realisable, reinforcing the real income principle.
The Court refused to quash a detailed GST show-cause notice, holding that the purchaser must participate in adjudication over alleged fraudulent ITC claims.
Input tax credit was upheld as the requirement of actual tax deposit by sellers was introduced only prospectively and could not be applied retrospectively.
The tribunal rejected duty demands after finding no evidence of circular trading or overvaluation. Valid licences and verified exports were held sufficient to defeat the Revenue’s case.
The High Court set aside a GST notice covering four tax periods in one proceeding. It held that Section 73 requires year-wise notices with separate limitation for each assessment year.
The High Court held that issuing a single GST show cause notice for more than one financial year is impermissible. Each financial year is a separate unit with its own limitation period.
The issue before the Authority was the classification of evaporators and condensers. It held that heat exchangers imported separately are classifiable as parts, but follow the main unit’s classification when imported together in CKD/SKD condition.
The CAAR Delhi examined whether annuloplasty rings qualify as artificial body parts. It ruled that since the device only supports an existing heart valve annulus and does not replace anatomy, classification lies under the residual medical implant category.
The High Court closed the writ petition after noting that the GST Appellate Tribunal had been constituted, directing the taxpayer to pursue the statutory appeal without limitation objections.
The Kerala AAR held that while ITC on purchase of used vehicles is barred under the margin scheme, credit on repairs, refurbishment, and other business expenses remains admissible.
