The Court upheld the customs officer’s reasonable belief for seizing goods over alleged misclassification and found the challenge premature due to pending statutory proceedings. The ruling confirms that classification disputes must be resolved through adjudication under the Customs Act.
Kerala High Court allows refunds of additional customs duty on timber imports from Myanmar using the lower conversion factor of 1.416 cubic meters per Hoppus ton for imports before 11 May 2012.
Kerala High Court rules that increases in plinth area due to extensions justify fresh building tax assessment, with credit given for previously paid tax.
The Court held that an Ayurvedic treatment centre must be classified as a hospital, not a hotel, for the relevant years. The luxury tax assessment was set aside, and authorities were directed to reassess accordingly.
The Court held that the authority could not reject the ruling request based on earlier proceedings that were closed without deciding tax issues. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
Kerala High Court held that proceedings against petitioner [recipient] for Input Tax Credit mis-match cannot be sustained since no proceedings have been initiated against the supplier. Accordingly, proceedings initiated against recipient is not legally sustainable.
Kerala High Court held that benefit of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme (SVLDRS) admissible even though payment was affected after cut of date as extension since payment was made within period extended on account of COVID-19 pandemic.
The Court held that adjudication by an officer who had previously conducted an audit on the same issue displayed a pre-disposed mind, setting aside the impugned order for independent reconsideration.
Court held that exemption under Section 10(23BBA) applies only to bodies constituted under State enactments, not to temples or deities whose income is separately taxable. Temples must seek relief under Sections 11–12 instead.
The Court held that interest paid for delayed Agricultural Income Tax cannot be deducted under Section 37. Since AIT itself is not deductible, the related interest also fails eligibility. The ruling confirms that such payments do not qualify as business expenditure.
