Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka HC grants Cultgear Pvt Ltd refund, pending GST tribunal formation, with a bank guarantee. Liberty to appeal extended til...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the Madras High Court judgment in Amarjyothi Carrying Corporation v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) on entitlement to persona...
Goods and Services Tax : Discover how the Odisha AAR allows ITC on exempt services where the supplier has charged GST. Understand conditions and implicatio...
Goods and Services Tax : In M/s. THDC India Ltd, Uttarakhand AAR ruled that government authority services like design engineering and water tank constructi...
Goods and Services Tax : In Piramal Enterprises Ltd v. State of Maharashtra, Bombay HC ruled against revenue's selective interpretation of business transfe...
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 : Karnataka HC remands R.S Marketing's case, granting a fresh hearing on ITC discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A due to non-co...
Service Tax : Zest Buildtek Promotors Vs Deputy Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Madras High Court)Issuance of attachment order under provi...
Goods and Services Tax : Allahabad HC rules that failing to record reasons in INS-01 before initiating a search under Section 67 of CGST Act invalidates th...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court rules that appeals cannot be dismissed for procedural lapses, emphasizing timely filing. Key case: Indian Potash...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the Kerala High Court ruling on luxury tax applicability to services at Ayurveda Centre, Beauty Parlor, and Convention Cen...
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 Hon’ble CESTAT, Ahmedabad, held that a service recipient can only see the Cenvatable document under which Service tax paid/ payable has been indicated. However, it is not the case of the revenue that the service provider does not exist.
CCE Vs. Shrushthi Plastics (P) Ltd. – CESTAT, Chennai, applied the ratio of the Apex court decision in case of Nebulae Health Care Ltd. Vs. CC Chennai [2006-TIOL-1380-CESTAT-MAD], which squarely applies to the instant case
CCE Vs. Control & Switchgears Contactors Ltd. – Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Tribunal, wherein it was held that while the Respondent had declared that goods were not meant for retail sale, revenue could not produce any evidence to contrary and hence, duty was rightly paid as per Section 4 of the Excise Act.
Shree Krishna Nylon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT MUMBAI] Refund claim cannot be denied when excess duty has been returned through debit/credit Notes, and, the said amount is accounted as ‘receivable’ in the Balance Sheet – sufficient evidence that incidence of duty has not been passed on.
Shree Cement Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – CESTAT, New Delhi, held that a plain reading of Rule 3 and Rule 7 of the Credit Rules clarifies that there would be no restriction if assessee avails Cenvat credit on procurement of inputs/input services prior to start of manufacture.
Principal Commissioner of Custom Vs. Riso India (P.) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Duty’ as defined in Section 2(15) of the Customs Act, is wide enough to cover all kinds of duty, including SAD. Hence, as per Section 3(8) of Customs Tariff Act
Dailmer Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT MUMBAI] When import of identical cars have been made at lower values which are comparable to the value declared at the time of filing Bill of Entry for sale of the cars imported under Carnet
Gupta Steel Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar – Supreme Court held that price was genuinely revised & gets reduced by amending the MOA and there was nothing wrong on the part of the Appellant to declare the price in the BOE.
Challenger Computers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Trade & Taxes (Delhi High Court) In terms of the Section 51(a) of the DVAT Act, the selling dealer will issue the credit note to the buying dealer where the sales are subsequently reduced.
Zylog Systems (P) Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes- Where the smart cards are prepared in terms of an agreement with the customer by embedding requisite information, which couldn’t be sold in open market
