Sponsored
    Follow Us:

All High Courts

HC cannot invoke Section 130 at threshold unless applicant shows why it deserves to be discharged

March 4, 2020 630 Views 0 comment Print

Kohitoor Transport LLP Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) The writ applicant availed the benefit of the interim-order passed by this Court and got the vehicle, along with the goods released on payment of the tax amount. The proceedings, as on date, are at the stage of show cause notice, under Section 130 of […]

Procedural law should not take away right to claim Transitional Credit: HC

March 4, 2020 1428 Views 0 comment Print

Rishi Graphics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors (Calcutta High Court) A procedural law should not take away the vested rights of persons that are provided to them by statute. The petitioners have approached this court with a prayer for allowing them to file/upload in GST TRAN-1. The petitioners intend to file TRAN-1 […]

Failure to pass fresh Provisional attachment order- HC imposes cost of ₹ 5 Lakh on GST Authorities

March 4, 2020 1794 Views 0 comment Print

Section 83(2) is crystal clear that the provisional attachment shall cease upon expiry of one year. It was therefore incumbent on the authorities to either release the provisional attachment by informing the bank or by issuing a fresh order of provisional attachment, if the law so allowed.

Goods cannot be detained merely because driver has taken a different route

March 4, 2020 7908 Views 0 comment Print

Detention of goods on the ground that the vehicle took a different route or reached wrong destination- The High Court observed that allegation of ‘wrong destination’ or that the driver has taken a different route is not a ground to detain the vehicle carrying the goods or levy tax or penalty. It was held that the fact that the vehicle was found at another place does not automatically lead to any presumption that there was an intention of evasion of tax. The amount collected was directed to be refunded with interest @ 6%. 

HC releases goods detained on the ground of wrong classification of goods

March 4, 2020 4725 Views 0 comment Print

Daily Fresh Fruits India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Asst. State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court) Detention of goods on the ground of wrong classification of goods- The High Court quashed detention order on the ground that this was a bona-fide case of dispute in the classification of goods and directed release of goods. FULL TEXT OF […]

Section 130 of GST cannot invoked straightway merely on suspicion

March 4, 2020 2028 Views 0 comment Print

A T Trading Company Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) In any circumstances, the authorities concerned cannot invoke Section 130 of the Act at the threshold, I.e., at the stage of detention and seizure. What we are trying to convey is that for the purpose of invoking Section 130 of the Act at the […]

Cenvat Credit cannot be denied on assumptions of fraudulent intention

March 3, 2020 921 Views 0 comment Print

More-so, when clearance and supply of dutiable goods is accepted and there is no denial to the fact that a purchase order existed for supply of dutiable goods, on mere assumptions the intention cannot be determined or it can be concluded that the conduct was fraudulent.

TP: Appropriateness of one or other method cannot be gone into Section 260A appeal

March 3, 2020 3093 Views 0 comment Print

PCIT Vs. Gulbrandsen Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (Gujarat High Court) The Tribunal has taken into consideration the voluminous documentary evidence on record for the purpose of coming to the conclusion of adoption of TNMM by the assessee as the Most Appropriate Method of arriving at ALP. The Delhi High Court in the case of Make My […]

GST Section 129(3) proceedings concludes on deposit of Bank guarantee

March 3, 2020 3642 Views 0 comment Print

High Court states that if bank guarantee is deposited within prescribed time, then the proceedings taken out under section 129(3) of GST Act shall stand concluded in view of the provisions of section 129(5).

FBT on providing Free Medicine Samples to Doctors by Pharma Companies

March 3, 2020 720 Views 0 comment Print

Since there was no employer-employee relationship between the assessee on one hand and the doctors on the other hand to whom the free samples were provided, the expenditure incurred for the same cannot be construed as fringe benefits to be brought within the additional tax net by levy of fringe benefit tax.

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031