Considering the fact that the petitioner has already deposited tax and penalty under section 129 of the IGST Act, by way of ad-interim relief, the respondents are directed to forthwith release Truck No.HR-55-J-2944 along with the goods contained therein.
M/s. Neuvera Wellness Ventures Pvt Ltd Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) The impugned order dated 2.4.2019 passed by the second respondent (Annexure-H to the petition) is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the second respondent who shall decide the same afresh in accordance with law after giving […]
Pr. CIT Vs Suzlon Energy Limited (Gujarat High Court) Where assessee had debited unrealized loss due to foreign exchange fluctuation in foreign currency transaction on revenue items to its profit and loss account on the last date of accounting year, the same should be allowed as deduction under section 37(1). FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH […]
Department was not justified in cancelling the certificate of entitlement of assessee-company and denying refund of tax paid on purchase of raw material and intermediate products as since the date when the actual production started, assessee did not have the eligibility certificate, they continued to discharge tax liability as a normal dealer and claimed input tax credit by adjusting the same against output tax liability and on account of retrospective grant of eligibility certificate, assessee became liable for full amount of output tax liability, therefore, the department was directed to work out the amount of refund that assessee would be entitled to and adjust the same towards outstanding dues.
Petitioner has submitted that there is no condition for making payment of tax as a pre-condition for filing return of Form GSTR-3B. It was submitted that in the absence of any such provision, the on- line system of the respondents which does not allow filing of returns without payment of tax liability admitted as per such returns is contrary to legal provisions. It was further submitted that if the petitioner is not able to file return in Form GSTR-3B by 20th April, 2019 the petitioner would be deprived of input tax credit.
Vishnu Aroma Pouching Pvt Ltd Vs. Union Of India (Gujarat High Court) In a magic show, every spectator is well aware that magic does not exist but still at the end he is amazed and left in awe by the magician. The so called magic happens right infront of their eyes but unable to decode […]
Purnima Komalkant Sharma Vs DCIT (Gujarat High Court) In the given case, the petitioner is an individual and engaged in the business of real estate and transportation and ship breaking. The return of income was accepted without any scrutiny. Thereafter, a search action took place at the premises of the petitioner. Upon conclusion of such proceedings, […]
Since there was an order of the Settlement Commission under section 245D(4) in relation to the assessment year in respect of which assessment was sought to be reopened, AO had no jurisdiction to reopen the assessment as once an order had been passed under section 245D by Settlement Commission, assessment for year stood concluded.
It appears that instead of tracing out the real culprit, the respondents are seeking the easy way out by penalising the transporter who prima facie does not appear to have doubted the person who engaged it for transport of the goods as an invoice and e-way bill were produced by him, and recovering the tax, penalty and fine from him.
Naitik Enterprise Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) In terms of sub-section (25) of section 2 of the Customs Act, once the goods are cleared for home consumption, they no longer retain the identity of the imported goods. Under the circumstances, once the goods have been cleared, such goods no longer remain to be […]
