In present facts of the case the Hon’ble High Court relied on the Judgment of M/s Canon India and have observed that Joint/Additional Director (in short “DRI”) is not the ‘proper officer’ to issue show cause notice under Section 28(4) of Customs Act, 1962.
Sales tax authority should de novo do revision/reassessment under Section 27 of TNVAT Act by considering the objections of assessee-dealer and made an order as expeditiously as possible.
Modern Insecticides Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court) In the present case, it has come on record that the samples with respect to the goods in question have already been taken by the Authorities. Moreover, the petitioner is a 100% export-oriented unit and thus, any difference in the declaration […]
Eficaz Project Limited Liability Partnership Vs Commissioner, Uttarakhand GST Commissionerate (Uttarakhand High Court) The second limb of argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, even if at all a decision was required to be taken on an application submitted by the petitioner on 30th May, 2020, requesting for the cancellation of the […]
Section 40(a)(i) did not contemplate order wise commission based on the order value. Consequently, the expenditure on export commission payable to non-residents for services rendered outside India became an allowable expenditure.
Applicant was not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for allegedly involved in wrongfully availing ITC on the basis of fake bills of RS. 737 crores as if assessee was enlarged on anticipatory bail then, there were all chances that assessee would tamper with the evidence and witnesses and at the time of trial, assessee would not be available.
High Court dismissed to entertain a petition pertained to reversal of input tax credit (ITC) under Section 19(4) of TNVAT Act as assessee had statutory alternative remedy to file an appeal or revision as the case may be under the Act.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition filed against order under Section 27 of TNVAT Act, by observing that alternate remedy is available to file appeal under Section 51 of TNVAT act as in the impugned order detailed finding on facts has been provided.
Nayara Energy Limited Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) On substantive part, there is no adjudication which is necessary as the respondent – authority agrees to credit the amount of Rs.50,88,42,582/- in account of the petitioner and sum of Rs.39,05,121/- in the account of the Consumer Welfare Fund by issuance of payment advice RFD-05. […]
Bank could not withhold the original documents of the mortgage property in question for another dues under PMMY scheme, once assessee had repaid the loan as the financial assistance advanced by bank under PMMY Scheme was advanced without any collateral security.
