Southern Railways had to pay the GST Tax with reference to the license fee collected from the contractors and the contractors were liable to pay the service tax with reference to the parking fee collected from the customers, who all were end users.
Recovery can only be made against deductor who is the assessee in default, to the extent tax was deducted by the deductor and not remitted to the Income-tax Department. To the extent tax was deducted by the second respondent and not remitted by the second respondent to the Income Tax Department, recovery can be only directed against the second respondent as the second respondent is the assessee in default. The petitioner cannot be made to pay tax twice. Recovery of any of such Tax Deducted at Source but not remitted by the second respondent has to be recovered only from the second respondent .
Raj Arivazhagan Vs ITO (Madras High Court) In the case on hand, the petitioner had raised a specific objection that the proposal for reopening the assessment is liable to be dropped, since there is no finding that there was escapement of income. It was further contended that for the purpose of carrying on verification exercise, […]
State Bank of India Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court) Whether the Financial Institution, which is a secured creditor, or the department of the government concerned, would have the ‘Priority of Charge’ over the mortgaged property in question, with regard to the tax and other dues? No doubt that the rights of a secured […]
Courts were expected to ensure that all such legal grounds available to the parties were adjudicated before the proper forum and only after exhausting the statutory remedies, writ petitions were to be entertained. Therefore, High court ordered assessee to exhaust the appellate remedy, either under Section 128 or Section 129 of the Customs Act, respectively and the courts must not provide an unnecessary opportunity to escape from liability merely on jurisdictional error.
Jayasakthi Papers Vs Commissioner of Customs (Madras High Court) The only question that arises for my consideration is whether the goods imported by the petitioner can be termed as a stock lot. This expression in normal parlance refers to those goods whose transaction value is less than the market value on account of their purchase […]
Section 153A only states that an assessment in terms thereof shall be completed in terms of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as if such return were a return required to be furnished under Section 139. It would thus suffice that in framing an assessment under Section 153A, due regard must be given to the principles of natural justice, which requirement will stand satisfied either by issuance of notice under Section 143(2) or a question-naire under Section 142(1). Therefore, a notice under Section 143(2) was not to be mandatorily issued prior to completion of an assessment in consequence of a notice under Section 153C.
AA520 Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited Vs DCIT (Madras high court) The scope of an ‘intimation’ u/s 143 (1) (a) of the Act, extends only to the making of adjustments based upon errors apparent from the return of income and patent from the record The scope of an ‘intimation’ under Section 143 (1) […]
The Hon’ble Madras High Court in Shri Nandhi Dhall Mills India Pvt. Ltd. v. Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGST & Ors. [W.P. No. 5192 of 2020 and WMP. No. 6135 of 2020] directed the Revenue Department to refund the amount of INR 2 crore collected from the assessee during the investigation. Held that, merely because the […]
Assessee had to exhaust the statutory remedy provided under the Act before filing writ petition challenging the levy of service tax passed on a deceased person.
