Madras High Court held that time limit of six years is reasonable time for passing of order under section 201 of the Income Tax Act in respect of non-residents. Accordingly, order impugning assessment years beyond six years is set aside.
Bombay HC set aside high-value SCNs issued without prior consultation. Upholding binding CBIC Circulars, Court ruled that pre-consultation is mandatory for tax demands exceeding ₹50 lakhs, citing SC precedents.
Some of the concerns which were raised by assessee such as right to privacy of the family being violated, etc., deserve to be addressed as any family-related CCTV footage which was with the GST department and violated the privacy of family members could not be used or disseminated in any manner.
While securing the Revenues interest under Section 110A of the Customs Act, conditions for provisional release should not be unduly harsh. Requirement to furnish Bank Guarantee of ₹22 lakhs was modified with execution of bond of Rs. 22 lakh.
Madras High Court held that MEIS would clearly qualify as an instrument u/s. 28AAA of the Customs Act bestowing financial or fiscal benefits, however, only Director General of Foreign Trade [DGFT] is empowered to cancel or suspend the same.
Scope of appeal under Section 28KA of the Customs Act, 1962, was limited, as the ruling obtained was binding on the persons mentioned in Section 28J of the Customs Act, 1962.
The contention of substantial compliance could not override the mandatory time limits under the notification. As there was no statutory requirement of an Eligibility Certificate, and the application for fixation of rebate was filed beyond the prescribed time, the appeal was devoid of merit.
The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner challenging the order dated 22nd November, 2024 by which the Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) Registration of the Petitioner has been cancelled retrospectively with effect from 29th December, 2017.
Patna High Court held that seizure memo without recording mandatory ‘reason to believe’ as required under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 is invalid and bad-in-law. Accordingly, order of confiscation is liable to be quashed.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that 5th Proviso to Rule 27(1) of the Special Economic Zone Rules, 2006 imposing export duty on supplies from Domestic Tariff Area [DTA] to Special Economic Zone [SEZ] is ultra vires. Accordingly, the proviso is struck down and petition is allowed.
