Goods and Services Tax : The High Court ruled that genuine clerical mistakes in GST returns cannot justify tax proceedings when the correction only reflect...
Goods and Services Tax : The Karnataka High Court held that non-submission of LUT/Bond prior to export is a curable procedural lapse. Refund claims cannot ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that once late fee under Section 47 is levied for delayed annual return filing, authorities cannot impo...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that ITC distribution by an Input Service Distributor arises only after conditions under Section 16(2) ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court held that merely uploading an order on the GST portal is not sufficient communication under Section 107. Limitation begi...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore Supreme Court's scrutiny of whether supplying cranes for services like loading, unloading, lifting, and shifting qualifies...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the case of Pradeep Kanthed v. Union of India where the Supreme Court issues notice to the Finance Ministry regarding the ...
Goods and Services Tax : Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax & Ors Vs Safari Retreats Private Limited & Ors (Supreme Court of India) The ...
Goods and Services Tax : The 45th meeting of Goods and Services Tax Council (“GST Council”) is scheduled to be held on September 17, 2021. The Ministry...
Custom Duty, Income Tax : The Karnataka High Court in M/s Pellagic Food Ingredients Private Ltd. v. Union of India [Writ Petition No. 14737/2021[T-CUS] issu...
Goods and Services Tax : The High Court granted interim relief to a contractor after observing that the determination of the Delhi Jal Board’s status und...
Goods and Services Tax : Observing that the charge-sheet had been filed and the maximum punishment under Section 132 was five years, the Court granted bail...
Goods and Services Tax : The Calcutta High Court quashed a GST adjudication order after finding it was based on grounds not mentioned in the show cause not...
Service Tax : CESTAT Delhi ruled that subscription and redemption of mutual fund units do not constitute trading under Section 66D(e) of the Fin...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court held that Section 73 does not prohibit issuance of multiple show cause notices for the same tax period when they address...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 32/2015-Central Excise Dated- 4th June, 2015 Ethanol produced from molasses generated from cane crushed in the ...
Service Tax : Circular No. 184/3/2015-ST Dated the 3rd June, 2015 It is further clarified that exemption from service tax still continues to ser...
Custom Duty : the floods in the State of Jammu and Kashmir (the State) from whole of the duty as specified under the First Schedule and whole of...
Excise Duty : Grants exemption from Basic Excise Duty to goods donated or purchased out of cash donations for the relief and rehabilitation of p...
Custom Duty : New posts have been created in the rank of Commissioners of Customs in DRI and DGCEI for adjudication of cases as investigated by ...
The High Court ruled that genuine clerical mistakes in GST returns cannot justify tax proceedings when the correction only reflects the true nature of transactions and causes no loss to the revenue.
The High Court granted interim relief to a contractor after observing that the determination of the Delhi Jal Board’s status under the CGST Act will decide whether GST applies at 12% or 18%.
The Karnataka High Court held that non-submission of LUT/Bond prior to export is a curable procedural lapse. Refund claims cannot be rejected solely on that ground and must be reconsidered.
The Madras High Court held that once late fee under Section 47 is levied for delayed annual return filing, authorities cannot impose an additional general penalty under Section 125. The court set aside the penalty and granted relief to taxpayers.
The Madras High Court held that ITC distribution by an Input Service Distributor arises only after conditions under Section 16(2) are satisfied. Authorities cannot insist on same-month distribution merely based on invoice issuance.
The Court held that merely uploading an order on the GST portal is not sufficient communication under Section 107. Limitation begins only after proper service under Section 169 is established.
The Bombay High Court ruled that legal services provided by an advocate to a partnership firm of advocates are exempt under service tax notifications. The tax demand and recovery proceedings were therefore set aside.
The Gujarat High Court set aside detention proceedings after finding unexplained delay in uploading FORM GST MOV-09 and denial of personal hearing. The ruling emphasizes strict compliance with Section 129(3) timelines and Rule 142(5).
Observing that the charge-sheet had been filed and the maximum punishment under Section 132 was five years, the Court granted bail. It relied on Supreme Court precedent emphasizing that prolonged incarceration and documentary evidence weigh in favour of release.
The Calcutta High Court quashed a GST adjudication order after finding it was based on grounds not mentioned in the show cause notice. The ruling reinforces that Section 75(7) prohibits confirmation of demand on new or different grounds without prior notice.
