HC stayed the demand of penalty and interest raised by the Revenue Department, during the pendency of writ petition, subject to the condition that the assessee deposits the entire amount of tax demanded within a period of 15 days, since the assessee wanted to avail the remedy under the provisions of law by approaching GST Appellate Tribunal
Order rejecting application of petitioner for revoking order of attachment of bank accounts is appealable under Section 107 of OGST Act.
Orissa High Court held that the date when the material was discovered is not relevant. What is relevant is the nature of evidence or material discovered during the inspection. It cannot be utilized for making assessment for other years unless their relevance to any other period is established.
Petitioner challenged SCN based on GST audit report contending that certain observations made in audit report to which petitioner is not liable to pay
Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Vs Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (Orissa High Court) It appears that the opposite party exported final products on payment of Central Excise duty of Rs. 69,98,64,638/- during the period 01.01.2017 to 03.2017, and claimed rebate, vide application dated 14.08.2017, under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, […]
Sourav Satapathy Vs Commissioner of CT & GST (Orissa High Court) Court finds that the petitioner has approached this Court challenging the demands raised by the authority vide Annexure-7 and Annexure-8. The contention of the petitioner is that he has already paid the amount vide Annexure-5 series. If the contention of the petitioner, that he […]
Sundar Pravat Das Vs Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Orissa High Court) Since the petitioner wants to avail the remedy under the provisions of law by approaching 2nd appellate tribunal, which has not yet been constituted, as an interim measure subject to the Petitioner depositing entire tax demand within a period of fifteen days from […]
Orissa High Court held that the essential component of Section 43(2) of the OVAT Act for attracting the penalty, viz., the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that the escapement of tax was without reasonable cause, is absent in the present case. Accordingly, imposition of penalty unjustified.
Orissa High Court held that there is mis-match of Rs. 5,18,230/- as against the reflected figure in RFD-01 at Rs. 2,22,97,228/-. Accordingly, court directed to refund the balance amount as only Rs. 5,18,230/- needs proper adjudication.
PCIT Vs Narayan Kumar Khaitan (Orissa High Court) Case Law on Service of notice required through Superintendent of Jail if assessee is in judicial custody. A search and seizure operation under section 132 was conducted on SM and group wherein certain incriminating documents were found. Subsequently, assessment in case of assessee was completed under section […]
