The respondents issued a show cause notice u/s. 28 and 124 of the Customs Act alleging a shortage of stock of diamonds imported after taking into account the exports effected, resulting evasion in customs duty to substantial extent.
Bombay High Court held that interest on delayed refund is payable as per section 56 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST Act) and the period for grant of interest would begin on expiry of 60 days from the date of the shipping bill.
Since 1986 to 1997, Petitioner acquired shares, in tranches, of Respondent No.4-Company. The Petitioner subsequently sold some of these shares. In April 2007, the shares of Rs.10/- each of Respondent No.4-Company were split into shares of Rs.5/- each.
Bombay High Court held that no case has been made by any of the petitioners to bypass the statutory alternate remedies. Accordingly, petition dismissed on account of available alternative remedies.
Bombay High Court restores GST appeal for Y. M. Motors Pvt. Ltd., rejecting technical dismissal, and remands the matter for reconsideration on merits.
In these shipping bills, the Petitioner, the Petitioner’s Customs brokers inadvertently declared the Petitioner did not intend to claim the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (“MEIS”) benefit by indicating the letter “N” instead of “Y” in the relevant digital REWARD column.
Bombay High Court halts further action on anti-profiteering reinvestigation notice issued to Vital Developers Pvt. Ltd. until the petition’s final disposal.
The Petitioner has paid the differential duty under the protest. Thus, vide the present petition, the petitioner challenges the impugned Press Release dated 15.07.2020 and the impugned show cause notice cum demand notice dated 17.04.2023.
By an Order dated 20th October, 2023, Respondent No. 1 rejected the Petitioner’s Application for condonation of delay of 80 days in filing the Return of Income. It is this Order dated 20th October,2023 which has been impugned in the present Petition.
Bombay HC dismisses appeal in CIT-13 Vs Shyam R. Pawar case, upholding Tribunal’s decision on share transaction dispute.
