Bytedance (India) Technology Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT 1. The petitioner is before the court aggrieved by two communications both dated 18th March, 2021 issued by the Principal Director General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence, Mumbai (“DGGI”) provisionally attaching petitioner’s bank […]
Income Tax Department Vs Sri D K Shivakumar (Karnataka High Court) The gist of the offence under section 276C(1) is the wilfull attempt to evade any tax, penalty or interest chargeable or imposable or under reports of the income. What is made punishable is “attempt to evade tax, penalty or interest” and not the “actual […]
Britannia Industries Ltd Vs ITC Ltd. (Delhi High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT 1. On 1 1th September, 2020, the Trademark Registry registered the following trademark in favour of the plaintiff M/s Britannia Industries Ltd., in respect of “biscuits, bread, buns, rolls, bakery products, coffee, tea, cocoa, sugar, rice, tapioca, […]
Omaxe New Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors (Delhi High Court) We are of the view that ‘voluntary statements’ recorded before the Senior Intelligence Officer cannot constitute pre-show cause notice consultation as envisaged in the paragraph 5 of the 2017 Master Circular. Consultation entails discussion and deliberation. There is back and […]
H.R. Enterprises Vs State Of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur) High Court observed that The assessees and the authorities under CGST/SGST/IGST are giving their own interpretation of the provisions of the Act relating to Goods in Transit. All stake holders are treading in the new GST regime with uncertainties as the path is comparatively […]
Union of India Vs AT And S India Pvt. Ltd (Karnataka High Court) The facts of the case reveal that respondent No.1 before this Court has challenged the order dated 31.01.2020 issued by the Principal Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise whereby the request of the petitioner for availing TRAN-1 credit has been rejected […]
Refund of excise duty paid under protest if any borne by assessee had to be made only within a period of limitation prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 notwithstanding the fact that assessee became aware of the wrong payment of tax only after the Central Board of Excise and Customs issued clarification bearing reference Order No. 2/1/2002-ST dated 24.4.2002. Thus, the period prescribed under section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 had expired long before the above were clarification was issued.
ONGC Tripura Power Company Ltd. Vs State of Tripura (Tripura High Court) In a significant legal victory for electricity-generating companies, the Tripura High Court has held State Governments cannot levy electricity duty on inter-State sale of electricity. ONGC Tripura Corporation Ltd had challenged the provisions of the Tripura Electricity Duty Act, 2019 (TEDA) by a […]
Under section 83 of the MGST Act, it is the Commissioner which has the competence to carry out provisional attachment of property including bank account subject to fulfillment of the preconditions of section 83.
CIT Vs Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Limited (Madras High court) It is abundantly clear from Sub-Section (2) of Section 80IA that an assessee who is eligible to claim deduction u/s 80IA has the option to choose the initial/first year from which it may desire the claim of deduction for ten consecutive years, out of […]
