The appeal is disposed of, answering the questions of law in favour of the Revenue; but restraining the respondent-Revenue from recovering the amounts refunded since as of now the levy of service tax on the payment in lieu of foreign agency commission will not be leviable as ‘Business Auxiliary service’ prior to 18.04.2006. Parties are left to suffer their respective costs.
Damodar Corporation Vs Union of India (Kerala High Court) Impugned orders passed under GST ACT were passed without hearing the petitioner, the said orders cannot be legally sustained inasmuch as they have been passed in violation of the rules of natural justice. Accordingly, I quash Ext.P14 series of orders and direct the 7th respondent to […]
Veer Pratab Singh Vs State of Kerala (Kerala High Court) The petitioners are dealers, inter alia, in brass and copper scraps, having their business concern in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu and Jamnagar, Gujarat, respectively. A consignment of scrap that was being transported from Coimbatore to Gujarat from the 1st petitioner, as consigner, to the 2nd petitioner, […]
Gokul P.G. Vs State of Kerala (High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam) Sections 129 and 130 are independent provisions, and that, while a detention of goods and vehicle under Section 129 could entail proceedings under Section 130, in situations where the detained goods/vehicle are not cleared by the owners thereof within a period of 14 […]
Glonia Impex Vs Assistant Commissioner (SIIB) (Kerala High Court) The petitioner who is stated to be a supplier of diamonds, and a registered dealer under the Goods and Service Tax Act, within the jurisdiction of Mumbai, states that he had supplied diamonds to M/s. Nebal Tradings during the period 2017-18 and 2018-19 and the said […]
The issue under consideration is whether non-registration of the consignor or the alleged mis-classification of the goods under transportation can be a ground for detention under Section 129 of the GST Act?
The issue under consideration is whether a trainee is excluded from the definition of the term ’employee’ under the Gratuity Act? A trainee is not excluded from the definition of the term ’employee’ under the Gratuity Act. What is excluded is an ‘apprentice’.
The current petition is filed to seek the permission to upload the returns for the past period to avail eligible Input Tax Credit (ITC). direct the respondents to amend the Registration Certificate issued to the petitioner so as to make it valid from 01.07.2017, and permit the petitioner to upload the returns for the past period.
Carlo Technical Plastics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Kerala High Court) The Kerala High Court has held that even if inadvertently certain amount has been paid in a case where there is no provision in the Foreign Trade Policy for refund, the Government cannot unduly retain the amount. The case involved payment of Terminal […]
The issue under consideration is whether the rejection of advance authorization against the shipments for fulfillment of export obligations is justified in law?
