High Court dismissed to entertain a petition pertained to reversal of input tax credit (ITC) under Section 19(4) of TNVAT Act as assessee had statutory alternative remedy to file an appeal or revision as the case may be under the Act.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition filed against order under Section 27 of TNVAT Act, by observing that alternate remedy is available to file appeal under Section 51 of TNVAT act as in the impugned order detailed finding on facts has been provided.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & GST (Madras High Court) Facts- Exemption claimed by the petitioner was rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner sought settlement of dispute under the Sabka Viswas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. However, revenue argued that lubricant figures in 4th schedule of the Act and such goods are expressly […]
In the said case, the Hon’ble High Court rejected appeal of Revenue and have observed that deduction under Section 36 would be available to the assesse as the business undertaken by the assesse could not be termed as extension of its business.
Cognizant Technology Solutions India P. Ltd. Vs Asst.CIT (Madras High Court) Facts- Impugned notice was issued under section 148 for reopening of the assessment. The petitioner questioned the legal validity of the initiation of the reopening proceedings. Conclusion- If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the particular issue has not been considered or […]
The case of the petitioner is that the impugned attachment under Section 83 of the CGST Act is without any statutory sanction as it is consequent upon action under Section 67 of the Act, which deals with the power of the authorities to engage in inspection, search and seizure. The scope of Section 87 is wholly based upon the ‘opinion’ of the concerned Commissioner to the effect that the interests of the revenue were to be safeguarded and sanctioning coercive recovery proceedings of the nature of bank attachment in a particular case.
Cognizant Technology Solutions India Private Limited Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) Conclusion: In present case, the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Madras High Court provided relief to the Petitioner observing that in the absence of new facts coming to the knowledge of the Assessing Officer subsequent to the original assessment proceedings, the reopening could not […]
Section 54 of the CGST Act to ‘any person’ and would include the SEZ as well and accordingly, it shall be entitled to claim the refund of erroneously remitted tax.
HEC India LLP Vs Commissioner of GST and Central Excise Audit-II (Madras High Court) GST Authority needs to communicate reasons for blocking ITC of the taxpayer Hon’ble Madras High Court has held that the GST Authority necessarily needs to communicate reasons to the taxpayer if the taxpayer’s Input Tax Credit (ITC) is blocked. In the […]
Suresh Trading Corporation Vs The Asst. Commissioner (Circle) of SGST (Madras High Court) Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order dated October 10, 2019 in which the GST certificate of the Petitioner was cancelled. However, it is to be noted that SCN which preceded the same was not been issued in the prescribed template […]
