M/s. Caterpillar India Pvt Ltd Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court) According to the respondents in all writ petitions, the confiscation of the goods is perfectly in order as the petitioners have, admittedly, transported the consignments without valid E-way bills, thus violating clause (iv) of Section 130(1) above being, a contravention of the Act/Rules […]
U/s. 69 of the GST Act, the Commissioner is having power to arrest if he has reasons to believe that a person has committed an offence specified in Clause (a) or (b) or (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 132 of the GST Act. Section 132(1) (a), (b) and (c) of GST Act define types of offences and according to which, whoever commits offence of supply of any goods or services without issue of any invoice or issues any invoice or bill without supply of goods or services of both or avails input tax credit using such invoice, shall be punished with imprisonment of term which may extend to 5 years and with fine, if the amount involved is more than Rs.500 Lakhs.
Learned counsel for the Union of India has opposed the petition and has submitted that the offence committed by the accused is serious in nature. In-fact, the accused had issued bogus invoices without actual movement of goods which led to involvement of fraudulent input taxes amounting to Rs.40.58 crores. Admittedly, company has deposited Rs.6.95 crores with the concerned authority towards non-payment of G.S.T. Case is still under investigation.
Brahm Datt Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) CONCLUSION – Re-assessment not tenable in law in as much as the same is barred by limitation. Any subsequent amendment in the re-assessment provisions, if not specifically mentioned, are presumed to be prospective and hence not applicable in the present case. FACTS – Petitioner, a senior citizen, was […]
When AO finds the accounts of the assessee to be complex and in order to protect the interest of the revenue, it is justifiable to direct for special audit.
Ms. Hindustan Newsprint Ltd. Vs ACIT (Kerala High Court) In the present case, the Tribunal had permitted devaluation with respect to the items in which the committee had recommended 100% devaluation confining the actual devaluation to 80%. The Tribunal disallowed 20% of the claim finding it to be the scrap value of the devalued items. […]
OC orders to provisionally release the seized goods upon the petitioner executing a bond in FORM GST INS-04 for the total value of the seized goods, and furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs.50 lakhs.
Loss on account of issuance of debentures at premium was expenses for the borrowing and therefore, was allowable as deduction u/s 37 in computing the income however, the loss suffered had to be applied in respect of each year covered by debentures, to an appropriate extent.
Refund claim of Vodafone’s worth Rs. 4759.74 Crores was rightly rejected as Revenue had the right to adjust the substantial outstanding demands against the refunds that arose but had not yet been determined due to ongoing scrutiny proceedings.
Income on sale of prepaid cards to the extent of unutilized talk time did not accrue as income in the year of sale. If assessee had failed to perform the services as promised, it would be liable and under an obligation to refund the advance payment received under the ordinary law of contract or special enactments, like the Consumer Protection Act.
