In the instant case, indisputedly the application was filed by the appellant as a buyer of the goods(conveyor belts) from M/s. Fenner (India) Ltd. who paid the duty under protest much after a period of limitation (six months) as prescribed under the mandate of law disentitles the claim of refund to the appellant as prayed for in view of the judgment of this Court in Commissoiner of Central Excise, Mumbai II Vs. Allied Photographics India Ltd. case (supra) holding that the purchaser of the goods was not entitled to claim refund of duty made under protest by the manufacturer without complying the mandate of Section 11B of the Act, 1944.
Supreme Court directs transfer of 3 writ petition filed against the decision of NAA to Delhi High Court. Supreme Court, observing that 20 writ petition filed against order of NAA is pending before Delhi High Court, 2 before Bombay High Court and 1 before Punjab & Haryana High Court, held that in the interests of a uniform and consistent view on the law, all the writ petitions should be transferred to the High Court of Delhi, where earlier writ petitions are already pending.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs PAN India Paryatan Limited & Anr. (Supreme Court) Once an admission ticket is granted, it is not in terms of Section 3(2) of the Act but only in terms of Section 3(1)(b) of the Bombay Entertainments Duty Act, 1923. Section 3(2) of the Act has no applicability for a […]
Considering the provision of Section 65 of the IBC, it is necessary for the Adjudicating Authority in case such an allegation is raised to go into the same. In case, such an objection is raised or application is filed before the Adjudicating Authority, obviously, it has to be dealt with in accordance with law.
Search and Seizure Powers of the Authorities under the provisions of Section 67 to 71 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and their limitations. Source- High Ground Enterprises Ltd Vs UOI (Bombay High Court); Writ Petition No. 8075 of 2019; Decided on August 14, 2019 Ratio of the Judgment Section 67(5) creates a […]
Since unutilized credit in the MODVAT scheme without incurring the liability could not be treated as sum actually paid by assessee under section 43B hence the unutilized credit under MODVAT scheme did not qualify for a deduction.
Nola Ram Dulichand Dal Mills Vs Union of India & Ors. (Supreme Court of India) The appellant challenged the change in the Policy ‘Vishesh Krishi Upaj Yojna‘ wherein 100% export units were denied the benefit of exemption on the ground that the policy binds the respondents for a period of five years and that such […]
UOI Vs Tax Bar Association (Supreme Court of India) In the matter of UOI vs Tax Bar Association, Hon’ble Supreme Court through its bench comprising of Hon’ble Justice R F Nariman & Hon’ble Justice Ravinder S Bhatt, at the outset, refused to interfere in order as passed by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and also clarified […]
In this case the Supreme Court of India in one of its judgements in a case involving Insurance Claim has held that unless the insured is duly informed, Exclusionary Clauses will not be applicable.
Know your rights! Learn about the fundamental right of being represented in a court under Article 21 of the Constitution.
