Writ Petition is disposed of, only by granting such liberty to the petitioner to approach the said Nodal Officer and make a representation within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such representation/request, the said Nodal Officer shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks thereafter. No costs.
Kun Motor Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Madras High Court) There is no dispute that the Petitioner is a dealer in motor cars and had received trade discount from the manufacturer from whom it had purchased the cars for retail sales at its show rooms. The trade discount which has been offered by […]
The issue under consideration is whether the respondent was justified in directing the petitioner to reverse the input tax credit availed on capital goods in excess of 4% vide the impugned order?
Where the proceedings under Section 138 of the Act had already commenced and during the pendency, the company gets dissolved, the directors and the other accused cannot escape by citing its dissolution. What is dissolved is only the company, not the personal penal liability of the accused covered under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Beauty Wares Vs Assistant Commissioner of CT & CE (Madras High Court) The petitioner has filed the writ petition for a mandamus to permit him to avail credit on the closing stock of input footwear available by rectifying Trans-I filed by them earlier. After considering the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court held in […]
According to the petitioners, Section 50 that provides for levy of interest on belated payments would apply only to payments of tax by cash, belatedly, and would not stand triggered in the case of available ITC, since such ITC represents credit due to an assessee by the Department held as such.
It is well settled law that to avail the exemption of duty under any Notification, the Rules and Regulations and the conditions prescribed therein have to be strictly adhered and there is no place for equity or intendment in the interpretation of the taxing By holding that the Rules of 1996 are only procedural or directory in nature, the learned Tribunal has frustrated the very purpose of Rules 3 and 4 in question by holding that the Assessee is entitled to the exemption for import made on 28.6.2003.
National Handloom Development Corporation Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Madras High Court) Having heard learned counsel and upon careful perusal of the pleadings, evidences and records of assessment produced before me, it appears very apparent that the principles of natural justice have been given a go-by in the present case. The extracts from the […]
Gemini Edibles and Fats India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Madras High Court) Point for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether the Revenue is justified in debiting the Social Welfare Surcharge (SWS) also from and out of the value of the relevant scrips issued under two schemes viz., MEIS and SEIS, […]
The Assessing Authority, in the matter of framing of assessments has to apply his mind to the issues that arise from the return of turnover filed by a dealer/assessee. However, orders of assessment are routinely passed based wholly on the proposals received from the Enforcement Wing and this case is no different.
