Assessee was entitled to alternative claim of exemption on export of software and IT enabled service under section 10A by following the decision in case of 2020 (113) taxmann.com 74 (SC) [Commissioner of Income-Tax III v. Mphasis Ltd.]
Counsel for the petitioner namely Smt Khusboo Devi has tried to address the Court while riding a scooter. The Court therefore declines to hear him. He should be careful in future even if the hearing is to take place through video conferencing.
M/s Vimal Petrothin Private Limited. Vs Commissioner, CGST and others (Uttarakhand High Court) Petitioner’s electronic credit ledger cannot be blocked for any period in excess of one year, in view of express provision contained in Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 86(A) of C.G.S. T. Rules. Thus, he submits that petitioner’s contention to this extent is correct […]
Best India Tobacco Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (Andhra Pradesh High Court) The important aspect for consideration in this writ petition is when the assessee files declaration under Karvivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (for short, ‘the KVS scheme’) i.e., whether the tax refund should be adjusted towards the arrears of the tax proper first and balance […]
Statutory dues, which came within the meaning of ‘operational debt’, could be claimed against the Corporate Debtor only under the provisions of the IB Code and not under any other law. Assessee was diercted to make payment of the statutory dues from the date of purchase of the subject vehicles by assessees, which would be made subject to other proceedings in relation to the said vehicles since assessees, being the auction purchasers, could not be asked to make payment of the statutory dues claimed against the Corporate Debtor in liquidation in respect of vehicles prior to their date of purchase by assessees.
Yasho Industries Limited Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) DGGI Officers entitled to issue summons under Section 70 of CGST Act An inquiry was initiated and summons were issued against the assessee to give evidence and produce the documents in connection with the inquiry initiated for alleged incorrect IGST refunds. This petition was filed […]
Assessable person cannot be denied access to vital piece of evidence which can prove him innocent in the eyes of law by the department. Further, since this was not done, adverse inference must be necessarily drawn against the Respondent.
M/s. Bharat Aluminium Company limited Vs Union of India and others (Chhattisgarh High Court) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the notice was served on petitioner vide Annexure P-1 dated 01.07.202020 wherein an Input Tax Credit as claimed by the petitioner was 95464.59 lakhs and 2A GST, ITC Form was of 86606.67 in […]
ARS Steels & Alloy International Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court) GST Landmark Case Law: Hon. Madras HC – Section – 17(5)(h) of CGST Act – No Reversal of ITC in Respect of Loss of Inputs During a Manufacturing Process The petitioners are engaged in the manufacture of MS Billets and Ingots. […]
Reviving of assessee’s case after 18 years, the Opposite Parties had acted unreasonably particularly since assessee could not have reasonably expected that the proceedings against it would be kept alive for these many years without any action being taken and also, assessee could not be expected to preserve its records for these many years and to be able to answer a SCN after 18 years.
