Gujarat High Court held that mere rendering of services cannot be roped into Fees for Technical Service (FTS) unless the person utilizing the services is able to make use of the technical knowledge etc. Simple rendering of services is not sufficient to qualify as FTS.
Delhi High Court held that Sanitaryware meant for use in the kitchen, toilets or bathroom and although it may portray some art work in its designs, it is not artwork or handicraft Therefore, duty drawback could only be claimed in category of goods falling Chapter 74 vide item No. 741802.
Exploring the case of Karmaxx Infotech vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST) in the Madras High Court about GST registration cancellation and legal compliance.
In the case of Vinplex India Private Limited Vs Additional/Joint/Deputy/ACIT, the Madras High Court addresses the consequences of unexplained income addition due to non-filing of reply by the assessee, accompanied by changes in address and email ID. The court directs the Assessing Officer to pass a speaking order.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble High Court observed that the petitioner was rendering advisory services to entity in Singapore. The petitioner had repeatedly filed submissions before the concerned authorities (Adjudicating Authority as well as Appellate Authority) explaining that it is rendering “advisory services to overseas group companies with respect to investment avenues in transportation sector after performing its own analysis and due diligence”.
Madras High Court held that CTH 2008 19 20 specifically covers roasted areca nut / betel nut, accordingly, when there is a specific entry covering a product/commodity, the test of common parlance is irrelevant in determining classification.
Bombay High Court held that the transaction of payment of royalty for use of technology is inextricably linked with manufacturing activity and should be aggregated with other international transactions in the manufacturing segment for the purposes of benchmarking the same
Chhattisgarh High Court held that an application for extension of time by exporter to make exports beyond the period of 6 months was rejected by the department after more than 2 ½ years. Accordingly, exporters granted benefit of rebate of excise duty paid on excisable goods exported beyond time limit of 6 months.
Madhya Pradesh High Court the time period of 30 days stipulated in Section 128 is relaxable. Accordingly, review u/s 128 of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS Scheme, 2019) allowable if reasons are assigned by the Revenue which do not fall foul of reasonableness clause under Article 14 of Constitution.
Allahabad High Court held that seizure memo could not be sustained in the eye of law as authorities below have not recorded any findings with regard to submission of the petitioner with regard to that there was break down of the vehicle and the driver fell ill in the matter of e-way bill expiry.
